Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gery Chico

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. (non-admin closure) v/r - T P 19:04, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gery Chico

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

The subject appears to be fairly unremarkable, with the two claims to notability being that he is running for major of Chicago, and that he was given a local award. He does have coverage in the local press, but that is normal for candidates for significant local appointments, and WP:Politician does indicate that running for major by itself it not notable. There are no sources beyond the local press, and I wonder why people outside of Chicago would be interested. SilkTork *^{Tea time} 12:09, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. WP:Politician says that "members of the main citywide government or council of a major metropolitan city" are likely to be considered notable. Chicago is a major metropolitan city, and Chico is the former head of the Chicago Public Schools and also of the Chicago Park District, in addition to having been an unsuccessful candidate for U.S. Senator and mayor of Chicago. The article has numerous sources, which indicates that Chico meets the general notability guidelines. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 13:24, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Metropolitan90--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:42, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Metropolitan90 Geread (talk) 23:30, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:20, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:20, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Metropolitan90 Trilliumz (talk) 18:38, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Top municipal official in major cities like Chicago are notable. SilkTork's arguments would be quite convincing for a smaller city of a couple hundred thousand people, but they don't apply here. -LtNOWIS (talk) 01:08, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I was not convinced that the subject had broad coverage during the GA review and I agree with the nominator that the subject does not have sufficient notability for an encyclopaedia article. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:24, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there are quite a few citations that may point to influence, but he merely served in appointed positions restrained to Chicago, not in elected public office, and I don't think being board president specifically satifies public office notability, which leaves us with GNG, where the sources look as though they are similarly restricted to Chicago local matters, yet one could argue the coverage is significant, but is the content covered broad enough to justify keeping an article on an unelected local politician? I don't think so. Hekerui (talk) 13:47, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Metropolitan90 (talk) has said it far better than I can. Chicago citizens may want to know about him, even if I do not.--DThomsen8 (talk) 14:22, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I don't much care reading this either but he currently seems quite significant. We can revisit in 20 years or so, but for now, keep.Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:11, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Easily meets WP:Politician due to his positions with the Chicago Public Schools and Chicago Park District. Qrsdogg (talk) 17:51, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. He also passes my standards for notability of attorneys. He was "General Counsel to the Chicago Development Council ... Deputy Chief of Staff for Mayor Richard M. Daley" ... partner in two notable firms, including Altheimer & Gray, chair of several major civic committees in a major city, and candidate for two major offices. Bearian (talk) 19:36, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Wow. Wish they were all this easy. With multiple stories, not just repeats of the same one in the Chicago Tribune, Chicago Sun-Times and elsewhere, he easily satisfies WP:GNG. Msnicki (talk) 20:05, 31 May 2011 (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.