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 based upon the consensus that this fails to meet Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Diplomats, sub Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Basic_criteria, sub Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline. Proponents for keeping mostly either fail to provide sources, fail to point to guidelines or policy. Unsupported statements are likely to be given little weight by closing administrators. Delete. Aaron Brenneman (talk) 02:00, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

David Sproule[edit]

David Sproule (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

A minor Canadian diplomat. Has only been to one conference and not a particularly significant one at that. Does not meet Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Diplomats. Recommend delete. Suttungr (talk) 15:19, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:34, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: No significant coverage on Google or Google news. No reliable sources provided to establish notability beyond a single international tiff of marginal significance. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 19:46, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per lack of good sources found on Google and Yahoo that could support a biography. SwisterTwister talk 20:55, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Notable as former Canadian ambassador to Afghanistan and Thailand. Ambassadors are not minor. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:21, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Former Canadian Ambassador, gives equal status to any other such individual with title "Ambassador" on wiki, disagree phrasing Rotterdam Convention is a "minor convention", view number of nation signatories. I don't believe it is in the interest of users to delete bio's of people who were former Ambassadors. Setting the bar like that would indicate rule should be applied across the board, and that all serving or former Ambassadors are not of sufficient status to merit wiki entry. There are a number of news articles from reputable sources, interviews and reports available with a google search on his role as Ambassador to AfghanistanKurt Dundy (talk) 06:34, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The notability guideline does not give carte blanche to all ambassadors. True, the definition of 'significant' events is undefined and left to subjective opinion. But, IMO I believe the Rotterdam falls into the minor category Atrian (talk) 12:29, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Though his role in Rotterdam may have been that of messenger, the result is definitely noteworthy. Any substance that kills any many people as asbestos related illnesses, should have accessible wiki links and traces for research purposes. His role as Ambassador in Afghanistan could be flushed out with several other noteworthy details pertaining everything from the conflict to the treatment of detainee's by Canadian forces. There is a lot of information out there on those subjects that has simply not been linked. 41.208.164.14415:55 (talk), 11 August 2011 This was me Kurt Dundy

• Keep Canadian Ambassador would seem to meet the "international office" criteria in section one of WP:POLITICIAN. Valenciano (talk) 12:06, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant policy for ambassadors is WP:DIPLOMAT, not WP:POLITICIAN. And i don't think the sources provided establish notablity according to that policy. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 12:19, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Sproule is neither a judge nor a politician so this reasoning doesn't apply. Atrian (talk) 12:29, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 23:16, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 23:16, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Needs sources. If somebody can find reliable sources then I see no reason why it should be deleted but if not then it needs deleting — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naomib1996 (talk • contribs) 12:22, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CommentAdmittedly there are very sources listed here... but even casual google search provides articles with reputable new agencies and interviews on Afghanistan. There is also plenty of information to google about the detainee's and the conduct of Canadian forces he's commented on. The details and background around him and his role as Ambassador could do with additional flushing out. This was me as well Kurt Dundy

• Delete as per reasons given above. Atrian (talk) 12:29, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:GNG, references are not optional extras. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:17, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have started to flush out this article with references... The Afghan detainee issue in Canada is very notable, and Mr. Sproule's position as Ambassador in Afghanistan during this period puts him right in the middle of it. Kurt Dundy (talk) 23:39, 13 August 2011 (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.