Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Williams special adviser

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:09, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

=[[Ben Williams special adviser]]=

:{{la|Ben Williams special adviser}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ben_Williams_special_adviser Stats])

:({{Find sources|Ben Williams special adviser}})

No indication of meeting WP:POLITICIAN. Special advisor with little coverage on Google. References given are to a list with his name on it and a brief mention on a telegraph article saying he did not make the list of the top 50 most influential liberal democrats. noq (talk) 17:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:59, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:00, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Delete as a non-notable advisor. No sources that discuss the subject in more than trivial detail. Tassedethe (talk) 05:36, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Delete. Agree with the above, does not meet WP:POLITICIAN and I could find only passing mentions in reliable sources, so does not meet WP:GNG. Jenks24 (talk) 23:05, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Delete Not even a politician - just a midlevel bureaucrat. The relevant criterion is WP:BIO and he does not meet it. --MelanieN (talk) 23:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.