Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Wheaton

: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 keep. (non-admin closure) Yunshui 雲‍水 07:09, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

=[[Gary Wheaton]]=

:{{la|Gary Wheaton}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gary_Wheaton Stats])

:({{Find sources|Gary Wheaton}})

While not a hit piece, this is pretty close. The biography mainly consists of a discussion about him losing the Republican primary after resigning his seat due to some DUI arrests. There's no birthday, nothing about his personal life, nothing about his legislative achievements. Just the scandal followed by some gossip about the reactions of losing the primary by Wheaton and another candidate. AniMate 20:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Keep and improve - it is long-standing precedent here that state legislators are per se notable, even in New Hampshire. This should be closed soon as a :WP:SNOW keep, if you don't withdraw it yourself. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:53, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
  • I might agree if this was a biography, but its not. It's a coatrack attack page. The bulk of the article is about the election he lost, and every other bit seems to designed to make him look bad. The fact that it was just expanded boggles the mind. Rather than adding actual biographical information, you added more about the DUI arrest. For an administrator writing a BLP, you've done a horrible job here. You haven't made any attempt to make this article conform to WP:NPOV and you haven't added any biographical details. AniMate 22:56, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
  • response AniMate, I really resent that unjust accusation. Have you ever tried to research an article on a New Hampshire legislator? They elect them by the hundreds every two years, and the press comes frighteningly close to ignoring them. The guy only served four months in the legislature, and the only things he did of note were to get busted and resign, then to lose in his comeback attempt, and to diss his opposition in other folks' Facebook pages: this is what's available about him. RFD, one of the best state-legislator editors I know, was reduced to using a Letter to the Editor from the subject as a source for who the guy is and what else he has done. If I were in New Hampshire, I might be able to add more; but there is no intention of building an attack page or a coatrack. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:41, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

::::If anybody out there has good juju with the Wayback Machine, there should be a cache somewhere out there of his official website from his brief term in the legislature; but I'll admit I don't know how to find it. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:47, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Keep State legislators are consider to be notable. Thank you-RFD (talk) 21:29, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep though the article does need expanding to focus on other parts of his life and career. Valenciano (talk) 09:30, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 07:20, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Hampshire-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 07:20, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Note I expanded the article a little and some information about his business career-thank you-RFD (talk) 11:39, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep No need to get past the first sentence after the lead "former...member of the New Hampshire House of Representatives" He obviously meets notability. And, I don't see anything in the current version to indicate a violation of BLP.JoelWhy (talk) 12:35, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep - He meets WP:POLITICIAN. I don't see that the article is attack piece or coatrack. Per WP:BLP, we do need reliable sourcing for controversial material, and in this case we do have that sourcing. I don't see any issue with the amount of negative material in the article. From what I can see, it does correspond with what is reported about him, so there is no issue of that material being undue weight in the article. Essentially, the negative material is self-inflicted. -- Whpq (talk) 17:50, 16 May 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.