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. JohnCD (talk) 22:14, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Paulden

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete. Article, based on a mix of primary sources and purely localized media coverage, of a person notable only as a non-winning candidate for county supervisor (which is not an WP:NPOL pass) and as a local environmental activist with local groups (which is not a pass of our notability standards for activists.) Of the 32 references cited here, 17 of them are primary sources that cannot support notability at all -- and of the remaining 15 that are real reliable source coverage, every last one of them is local to his own city and many of them just glancingly namecheck his existence rather than being about him. Nothing here is substantive enough, or sourced well enough, to earn him permanent coverage in an international encyclopedia. If this were Santacruzpedia, sure. But it's not. Bearcat (talk) 09:13, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 09:28, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply, You say Quote: Of the 32 references cited here, 17 of them are primary sources. Hmmmm, OK ... So which ones are they???

1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28. A person's notability cannot be supported by the websites or newsletters of organizations that they're directly affiliated with; it cannot be supported by his own contracting license in a contracting licensees database; and it cannot be supported by raw tables of election results in a database of raw tables of election results. Bearcat (talk) 18:06, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, Notable historical preservation activist. Known and noted outside Santa Cruz. He's done work in other parts of California. Appeared on television multiple times. Interesting to see nomination for deletion at 09:13, 28 September 2016‎ and then deletion nominator casting deletion vote at 09:13, 28 September 2016. Well, I guess there's a lot to be said for keenness. Karl Twist (talk) 09:59, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If he were a notable historical preservation activist who was known and noted outside Santa Cruz, then he would be sourceable beyond the Bay Area's own local media alone. But exactly none of the reliable sources here leave the Bay Area. Appearing on television as a talking head on the news is not a notability freebie, if reliable source coverage isn't writing about the television appearances. And as for your "keenness" comment, do you even have a clue how the deletion process works? By definition, the page isn't created until I save it, so the moment of page creation and the timestamp on the nomination statement are always going to inherently be the exact same time. Bearcat (talk) 18:06, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:32, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Paulden is a historical presenvationist activist who gets a little attention in the local press, no attention more broadly. He does not pass any notability requirement that is workable. Also, the keep argument above cobnfuses name dropping with the type of indepth coverage needed to create a workable article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:04, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - a vanity page / perma campaign poster. Not notable outside of minor local coverage. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.