Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garrison Courtney

Garrison Courtney

Garrison Courtney (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This is a vanity page. Nothing is cited. I can't find anything on the DEA website that identifies Courtney as: "Chief of Public Affiars." Pilkington1984(talk)

This is a courtesy renomination. The article was originally placed incorrectly on WP:MFD. Zetawoof_(ζ) 08:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

• Keep: How about this ("Garrison Courtney, Section Chief, Public Affairs, DEA")? Plus 411 Google News hits suggesting notability. Gonzonoir (talk) 11:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
• Delete: Gonzonoir, these links prove that he does exist, but he is not mentioned in the Drug Enforcement Administration article or any of the other linked articles. The DEA website has no bio information on Garrison Courtney. This article reads like a resume and links to no secondary sources providing evidence of notability. The article also contains no citations to verify the claims it makes.

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
• Comment: I agree the article as it stands is pretty poor, but it's clear this guy is a prominent spokesperson for the department. His name's in so many press sources because he's the department's contact to the press. My understanding of how WP:BIO relates to unelected officials could be better, so I don't know for sure whether that qualifies him for notability, but I'd lean yes (with scope to be convinced otherwise if someone can quote me a relevant section of the rules). He's the public face of the department, in some sense. Gonzonoir (talk) 11:53, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

• Delete - there are no articles about him. That he is a spokesperson means his name will appear frequently but those are passing mentions. -- Whpq (talk) 14:30, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
• Keep - notability is demonstrated by by over 400 newspaper articles in which he is mentioned. Esasus (talk) 12:42, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - but none of them are about him. Being mentioned a lot doeesn't equate to notability. -- Whpq (talk) 00:29, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:27, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

• Delete unless we can find any material from reliable third-party sources that enables a biography to be written about him rather than articles which mention his name but are about other topics. Capitalistroadster (talk) 00:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
• Delete There are no are no secondary sources that address him directly in enough detail to meet wikipedia's notability requirements. He has not received "significant coverage" outside of this very article which is composed of piecemeal data.Pilkington1984 (talk) 03:44, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
• Delete yes, he does work for the DEA. Does that have anything to do with our notability requirements? No. Dlabtot (talk) 04:46, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
• Keep chief of public affairs for the DEA or any other national agency of similar importance is a notable position. DGG (talk) 05:08, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
• Delete Yes, he's a spokesperson for the DEA. Yes, I consider it a notable position, yet I'm still voting delete.

1. DEA official web site --> top domain, not independent, bad source

   News from DEA - News Releases --> Again not independent and it is the news releases with just his name on them.

   The University of Montana Broadcast Journalism Department --> Site search on Courtney's name yielded zero results, only tangentally related.

   LinkedIn: Garrison Courtney --> Not a reliable source.

   Virginia Association of Museums Annual Conference - March 25 to 28, 2006 - Speaker Biographies PDF (46 KiB) --> dead link

   Northern Network News - April 20, 2007 PDF (132 KiB) --> Finally! A good source, but it's short.

My conclusion is that there are too few reliable sources to build a biography with. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:51, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Looks to me like something might be broken with the site search for the UM Broadcast Journalism Department. He's got a listing in the Alumni Association. I didn't take the link out, but someone might. He did graduate there, class of 2000. --Abd (talk) 01:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• Strong keep per above. Ikip (talk) 10:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. Passing mentions do not create notability. Nothing to write an article about beyond the job title; as a spokesperson, he doesn't even have attributable views, since he's simply speaking on behalf of the department. WP:NOT#DIRECTORY. THF (talk) 22:54, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Courtney was the editor of NoMoCo. Vegetationlife (talk) 23:46, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment: Being the editor of a student journal at an extremely minor school is not a claim of notability. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

That's correct, it doesn't establish notability. The DEA position does, plus there is RS on his work for Katherine Harris; the editorship of NoMoCo is simply an independently-sourced fact. The article now has sources, nobody had bothered. (Still far from perfect, but there is enough source for a stub bio.) Please, how does an "extremely minor school" differ from a "minor school," or, for that matter, from a "school" that's part of a state university system? Or is this just AfD hyperbole? --Abd (talk) 01:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• Keep per DGG. Versus22 _talk 01:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
• Delete - No matter his title, he is simply a contact person for the press. His name is at the bottom of DEA press releases, but there is no biographical information coming from the DEA. What is the merit of all the trivial background info in this article? The article was largely created by a single user!Pilkington1984 (talk) 06:58, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. His name appears in many places due to the nature of his job, but none of the coverage is about him. Passing mention only doesn't establish notability. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 09:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
• Keep, per DGG. As to objections re vanity, single editor creating, all that, so stub it, already. We should not be deleting articles on notable individuals, just because they are Bad articles, we should be fixing them. I've largely stopped fixing articles up for AfD because half the time the article vanishes anyway. If I did the work now, would that affect the !votes above? Maybe, more likely not. If the closing admin takes it into consideration. That happens sometimes. Sometimes not. --Abd (talk) 23:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• Note. I did add some references to the article, and took out one snippet re the DEA Museum. From the accuracy of the rest of the article, I think that's probably correct, but it's unclear what the "involvement" is. In spite of the nomination claim, it's easy to find sources for "Section Chief, Public Affairs, DEA." For example, see News from DEA, January 10, 2008, reporting that Courtney was "on location" in Detroit for filming of DEA, a reality show produced by Spike TV. --Abd (talk) 00:57, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• Reply - The "ease" at finding sources isn't demonstrated with your example. At issue is notability. The Spike TV bit above is a press release. Furthermore, the claim that the PR piece reported him "on location" is blown completely out of proportion. The only mention of him is that he is the press contact on location in Detroit. That's not even in the main body of the press release. As for the references in trhe article as of this version, we have:

1. A press release which establishes his position. It verifies a fact but does not establish notability.
2. Alumni announcement from his university. Again, it verifies facts but does not establish notbility.
3. A news article from the Sarasota Herald Tribune. It has 3 sentences about him in the article text (counting his quote), and one item in the timeline summary. However, he is not the primary subject of the article, and the coverage is not significant.
4. A brief tid-bit in the MSU newspaper. This is like the alumni notice. It doesn't do much to establish notability.

-- Whpq (talk) 11:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

The Spike TV press release was not used to establish notability, but the title, as Whpq agrees. My point about the title is that the nomination raised the issue, and the implication there was that this might be peacock or exaggeration, a theme picked up by one !vote which raised the issue of a single editor creating the article (isn't that what usually happens, absent mountains of attention?). No, he's the Section Chief, all right. Now, is that a notable position? If so, we should have an article on the position, or on the person holding it. I prefer the former, in this case; that article then would have a short bio for any such person who held the position, if they don't already have their own article. In other words, Merge would be fine with me, as well as Keep. If we Merge, then the original article, which might have more detail, is there in history for anyone who wishes to see it. Keep until and unless we have the position article. As argument for notability: Newspapers could easily cite a DEA press release, and I assume many do, without giving the name of the person issuing. Some of the sources apparently actually contacted Courtney. They find it of interest to their readers ("notable") who was responsible for the statement. Courtney does not merely issue press releases, he manages Public Affairs, which covers weightier matters, hence the Spike TV involvement, "on location."

It is also possible that merge would be to Drug Enforcement Administration. In that case, there would be a section on the Public Affairs officer, which would show the current holder and perhaps any notable previous holders. The name of Garrison Courtney is not infrequently in news reports. A reader may say, "I've seen that name before, who is that," and, turning to the most complete (and ultimately, reliable, we are getting there) organized source of information on the internet, looks up the name. Anything found? My work on the article was ito make it verifiable, not to establish notability. Is it a notable position? And, on that topic, I turn to you, dear community, for guidance. The !votes here are mixed with opinions about the person holding it. If it is a notable position, then our readers deserve, if nothing else, a redirect from the name of a holder to where we cover the position, and a short bio of the holder there, if not separately. Garrison Courtney is slightly notable because of Katherine Harris, and marginally notable because of the DEA position. I'd say that marginal notability is additive. Your call. --Abd (talk) 15:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)