Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Santing

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. J04n(talk page) 16:47, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Al Santing

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

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

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

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

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

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

WP:BLPs of several people notable only as city councillors in a city not large enough to get its city councillors over WP:NPOL. These are all leftovers from a decade ago, when our notability rules for politicians were very different than they are now. In all six of these cases, the substance is purely local-interest and the sourcing is purely local-media, so no credible evidence has been shown that they qualify for "more notable than the norm" status — which is what it takes to get a city councillor over NPOL mk. 2016 if the city whose council they served on isn't a major metropolitan global city. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 07:50, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:33, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:33, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all non-notable local politicians.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:04, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all as I examined these and found nothing to suggest any actual convincing independent notability. SwisterTwister talk 06:33, 12 June 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.