Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Storm Poorun

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete --Allen3 ^talk 11:59, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Storm Poorun

Delete nn non-elected (i.e. not a Member of Parliament, or any other assembly) member of a minority (but not unpopular) UK political party. His page on their website] doesn't say he is the party spokesperson, so don't be mislead by that claim. -Splash 01:45, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

• I disagree, I understand that he is party spokesperson. In any event, he is known publicly via national television and radio media in England, as he has had a profile as an environmental protestor, and has appeared in newspapers, and on radio and television shows in relation to environmental issues. - Brett Collins 02:10, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
  • You'll have to prove those claims. The first three pages of Google hits certainly don't appear to mention any media attention at all. The very first Google is a Guardian bio-tub because he was a candidate for election earlier this year. He didn't win, however. -Splash 02:20, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Clearly he did not win as an MP, however, I stick by my last post. On looking at Google, I disagree with you, the first three pages for 'poorun' (depending how many results per page you set!) include articles in south london press and other local/regional papers, and the observer newspaper. I've personally seen him on the politics show (TV), and several times have heard him talking on Radio 4 programmes (BBC, discussing citizenship, genetically modified foods, and development in the Peak District National Park). Also, I'm sure he is still a spokesperson for the Green Party. What do others think? - Brett Collins 02:37, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
      • Keep One more thing: the agreed wiki guidelines on 'notability' state that the following should be kept (amongst many others): - Major local political figures who receive significant press coverage / Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events / Alternative tests: Other tests for inclusion that have been proposed include: The professor test -- If the individual is more well known and more published than an average college professor, they can and should be included./ Expandability -- Will the article ever be more than a hideous stub? Could the perfect article be written on this subject? / Google Test -- Does the subject get lots of hits on Google or another well known search mechanism? / All of these apply, so I would argue that the subject is at least notable.

• We're all well aware of what the guidelines say. Show me links here to the evidence of "signifcant" local media coverage that I must have missed, and all will be settled. -Splash 03:15, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Well, I don't doubt your awareness of the guidelines, but I still feel its important to point them out, as there is no reason for us to make any assumptions of awareness of guidelines, or otherwise, by other readers of, or contributors to, this discussion. I will provide evidential links as requested, at some point later, right now I'm in dire need of sleep! Check back sometime later today... - Brett Collins 03:21, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete As written, does not establish notability. Even the "Olan Trust", by its webpage's own admission, will not be functioning for another couple of months. (And will still not be notable imediately upon its birth.) --Icelight 16:32, July 18, 2005 (UTC)
  • I'd remind you of the guidelines - about a local figure who receives significant media coverage being notable (I will post some links to media coverage later when I have a chance); I also find it strange that you don't think a national spokesperson for the fourth largest party (in terms of both seats and overall number of votes) in England Wales is not 'more notable than the average college professor'! Could one of you answer that? Surely he is 'a lot' more notable than the average college professor, and therefore merits at least an entry (see my previous post above setting out the current guidelines on what is 'notable'). Certainly I've seen politicians of lesser or equivalent standing undeleted, e.g. [Brian Nugent],[Antonia Bance],[Jason Crummey] - Brett Collins 20:20, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
• Provisional Delete. Unelected, and not notable. If significant media coverage can be shown, I will consider changing my vote. --Scimitar ^parley 19:28, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
• Provisional Delete per Scimitar, where are you Brett Collins? Sirmob 03:22, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete notability not established. JamesBurns 07:21, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not elected = not notable. Radiant_>|< 10:56, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per Radiant. Xoloz 04:04, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
• KeepComment Here are a few articles I found, (but there's obviously more which are only available on paper - Southwark News, South London Press, Western Mail, Hastings Argus) {and he has appeared on BBC television news (regional and national) in relation to court appearances in the European Court and the High Court}: [South London Press];[Richmond and Twickenham Times];[MEPs Office];[Red Pepper Magazine];[Guardian];[GreenWorld];[Eastbourne Guardian];[Edgeware Times];[Local London];[South London Press] - Brett Collins 14:59, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Yeah, but those are all just one sentence mentions for quotes. There are lots of activists and lots of them acquire some media coverage by standing for election. Unfortunately, he's not a spokesperson for the party, hasn't done anything notable and didn't win an election. He's a great guy I'm sure, but he is still not notable. There are also plenty of lawyery types out there, and almost all of them are non-notable too, though I struggle to work out if he's even a lawyer or whether he just sits in the courtroom with them. -Splash 14:58, 20 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.