Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elizabeth McCaul

:{{la|Elizabeth McCaul}} ([{{fullurl:Elizabeth McCaul|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elizabeth McCaul}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Notability of subject is unclear to me. Also, much of the text appears to be a copyright violation, but main contributor claims source is public domain. HeirloomGardener (talk) 21:34, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. Formerly New York State's chief bank regulator; I don't think every state's chief bank regulator is notable, but there's an argument that New York's is. 150 Gnews hits, though some of those are press releases and judicial opinions where she's not named in her individual capacity. THF (talk) 22:06, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
• Strong keep. The article is a part of documenting the New York State Banking Department, which is a state agency with 600 full time employees. The Superintendent of Banks is the head of that agency, and I have included in that article a wikitable showing the Superintendents between 1851 through the present. Elizabeth McCaul is listed there as well as in the infobox of Governor George Pataki's cabinet. These links prompted me to create this article, which includes various sources. I invite HeirloomGardener to improve the article further, and I have tried to meet her objections. In response, she has started this AfD for reasons that are unclear to me. The Superintendent of Banks is the second most visible bank regulator in America. Although large US banks are regulated by the Federal Reserve, large foreign banks, such as the United Bank of Switzerland, are regulated by New York instead because they have New York offices. Hence, McCaul was a leader in recent efforts to make Swiss banks compensate Holocaust survivors. Anyone who regulates $2 trillion in bank deposits and serves in a Governor's cabinet for six years meets the notability test. Although I believe this is presented concisely in the article, I welcome HeirloomGardener to edit the article further. This is not an edit war. Racepacket (talk) 22:08, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
• Comment. Sources are not independent sources. One is text of a speech given by McCaul, two are press releases, and the last is essentially a copy of her bio from the company's website. This is why I questioned the notability of the subject. However, I can see where New York's Superintendent of Banks may be inherently notable, as THF mentioned above. HeirloomGardener (talk) 23:03, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
• There are 20 New York Times articles which reference her, and I have included footnotes to two of them. Also, "Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves" The other sources include press release from the Attorney General's Office and entities that hosted McCaul as a speaker. Racepacket (talk) 23:27, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
• Thanks for the additional sources and info. It seems to me that notability has been established. I'll switch to Keep on this. HeirloomGardener (talk) 03:10, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Before people decide to say there are no sources, they might do well to actually look. Of course the author should do it initially. But if other people would do it themselves when they find an article they think not sufficiently documented, we'd get much further. DGG (talk) 04:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Fine, you've made your point. Glad to know you never make mistakes. Can someone close this before I get attacked again? HeirloomGardener (talk) 17:24, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Obvious Keep Lots of news sources. Tractops (talk) 06:17, 15 February 2009 (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.