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 per consensus. ---- Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 00:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen MacLoughlin[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Stephen MacLoughlin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Local Councillor, lost at last general election, fails WP:BIO, not a notable person. First AfD was closed because it was not listed correctly. Darrenhusted (talk) 09:17, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That was me, was in a hurry and never got round to re-posting after the initial malformed nom. Local councillor not notable for any other reason apart from failing to get elected at the general election- I believe there is a precedent that failed GE candidates are not notable for that reason. Delete per nom. Badgerpatrol (talk) 09:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
yes, that's what I said "...failed GE candidates are not notable for that reason". Possibly badly phrased however. The top elected official in Bournemouth politics is the MP, and council leader is not a position directly elected by the people (at least I don't think it is, correct me if I'm wrong). I doubt even if the majority of people within Bournemouth would recognise this man or put a name to his face, and our notabilty standards are quite a lot higher than "he's big in Bournemouth" anyway. Badgerpatrol (talk) 18:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies - it was the way you phrased it that caught me out. Bournemouth's MP is not, of course, a Bournemouth official involved in Bournemouth politics - he is involved in national politics. Council leaders are not as you say, directly elected, but then neither is the prime minister! I suspect that the majority of people in Bournemouth may not know his name, but they will certainly know his position. The key thing here is this: if the top councillor in this English town is not notable, then neither is the equivalent in any other town in England, Britain or the world. That may actually be the case, but I'm not saying it!Emeraude (talk) 10:55, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Touche re the Prime Minister not being directly elected...but I think the numbers of voters involved in national election (10s of millions) versus that for a local council ward election (a few thousand if not a few hundred) is significant. yes, I think that is the precedent, as you say. The leader of e.g. the city-wide council for a major conurbation (London, New York, Paris, Cairo, New Delhi, etc.) may be notable, because of the budgets, numbers and prestige involved. I believe as a general rule of thumb those quite this far down the scale aren't. Unless he is a national figure (he isn't, or at least no-one has yet proffered any evidence that he is) then I think his article should, and will, go.
Bournemouh locals may well know his position, and it would therefore be a good idea to create Local Council Leader or similar, as a generic article (or expand the relevant section of an existing one). That doesn't mean he has to have an article. I know that the captain of my local village Sunday cricket team exists- I don't know his name though, and I'd be mighty surprised to see an article on him show up here on Wikipedia. Badgerpatrol (talk) 11:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Point taken on the numbers, but a council leader is not "just a councillor".Emeraude (talk) 14:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Even being leader of a council still makes him just a councillor, there is no extra weight because he leads the council, and in fact he could be voted out of office by the other councillors in his group at any time. Darrenhusted (talk) 14:09, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed...for the benefit of potential non-UK contributors, "council leader" is not a position that carries a great deal of weight, prestige or additional responsibility, and he could indeed be gotten rid of at any time. It's not a directly elected nor full-time position and really he's hardly more notable than an ordinary councillor...who are not in themselves notable at all. Badgerpatrol (talk) 14:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong! It carries a great deal of weight, prestige and additional responsibility. A large number of council leaders are well known outside of their areas (e.g. David Blunkett was well-known as the leader of Sheffield council long before he became and MP). None of this has any bearing, though, on the present subject. Emeraude (talk) 15:27, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No it doesn't, and no, it doesn't. Badgerpatrol (talk) 13:41, 5 May 2008 (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.
More