Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Jack

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 keep. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 11:19, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Jack

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

This was mistakenly nominated at redirects for discussion, moving nomination here. Original user's rationale will be below. Ego White Tray (talk) 21:07, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 August 2#Aaron Jack: "This page is not being maintained, has broken links and the subject is no longer in elective office. BuffaloBob (talk)"

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 21:17, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kansas-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 21:17, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep United States state legislators are notable and this article should be cleaned up and updated. Thanks-RFD (talk) 21:30, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He's not a US legislator, he's a state one. Some state legislators are elected by as few as 7000 votes, which is completely insignificant in a country of 300 million. Ego White Tray (talk) 22:53, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I created this nomination as a purely procedural matter, but now I'm making my vote. Each seat on the Kansas House of Representatives represents only about 20,000 people. This is an utterly insignificant number, and his seat therefore does not have notability. Unless Jack attains some higher office someday, he isn't notable either. Ego White Tray (talk) 22:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment aside from WP:POLITICIAN already being widely accepted, the argument that 20,000 people is "utterly insignificant" is arbitrary. See WP:BIG, which explains that such arbitrary numbers are meaningless in determining Notability. For example, how many would be necessary to be significant? 50,000? 100,000? 342,678? Or 342,679? (Just ONE short of significant. Darn it!)--Paul McDonald (talk) 16:14, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. State legislators are notable per WP:POLITICIAN ("members or former members of a national, state or provincial legislature"). The deletion rationale is not valid. The fact that the subject is no longer in office is irrelevant. Notability does not expire. Keeping the page up to date is a matter for editing, not deletion. The population size of the subject's constituency is also not relevant here. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Once notable, always notable. See WP:POLITICIAN. Enos733 (talk) 03:43, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in addition to the reasons above, we normally find that state legislators pass WP:GNG.--Paul McDonald (talk) 12:30, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notability is a given, so keep and fix – and especially, elaborate on the "resign or be fired" phrase. – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 20:29, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable under WP:POLITICIAN as a member of a sub-national legislature. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:45, 8 August 2013 (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.