Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin Trottier

Justin Trottier

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

Non-notable candidate in Ontario election. Recommend delete or redirect to Green party, 2011 election candidate page. Suttungr (talk) 13:06, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete Article fails to meet the notability guidelines for politicians. He appears to have received a bit of coverage over his involvement with the creation of the Freethought Association of Canada, however the mentions are brief, and he is not the main subject of the coverage. Alpha Quadrant ^talk 13:23, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article provides 36 references and I admit I only looked at a couple. However, i distinctly remember looking at a video produced by the CBC in which Mr. Trottier was interviewed at length and was definitely the subject of the coverage. Ottawahitech (talk) 10:46, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I made the article initially, so I figured that I should chime in. I agree that he is not notable for the politician category. I made it because he's a bit of a national spokesperson for atheism in Canada. I think that right now its debatable whether he is notable enough for that. He has gotten some media exposure for that role, but it was as one of the organizers and spokespersons for the Atheist Bus Campaign in Canada that he had the most coverage. They seem to be planning yet another campaign as well, which he will again be the spokesperson. Perhaps we should expand the sections that are most relevant and notable for an encyclopedic article and reduce the sections that are not? Or perhaps the Atheist Bus Campaign article covers everything that is needed to be said about him? --Havermayer (talk) 14:46, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. — — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 15:25, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 15:25, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have never heard of this candidate until today, but after reviewing some of the references provided by the article I cannot see why Justin Trottier cannot have a page on Wikipedia. The interview with CBC shows him to be a sensible and articulate candidate, who even though may not get elected due to his age and the party he is running for, can bring some good discussion of issues to the table. For example the discussion about Catholic school funding is way overdue. This is a channce for Wikipedia to play a role in bringing about enlightenment, when others are to afraid to speak up. Ottawahitech (talk) 01:56, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

None of these are valid reasons. Please review Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (we're not a means for promotion, for instance) and Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Whether or not a person or subject is good, sensible, articulate, and so forth is immaterial. The function of articles for deletion is to assess notability. Neutrality^talk 07:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

in answer to neutrality: I still don't understand why Justin Trottier is considered not notable: "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." Ottawahitech (talk) 09:48, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Candidacy in an election is not intrinsically a notable criteria. I've seen too many articles that pop up just before an election just to give someone a platform to air their election propaganda. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 11:21, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that anyone who runs for elections is automatically not notable? - if not, why is Justin Trottier not notable Ottawahitech (talk) 15:58, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am saying that candidacy in an election does not automatically confer notability. If there are other reasons to keep the article then maybe the article is OK. But based on this criterion, the article fails the notability test. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 16:40, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please be specific, which criterion are you referring to? I am trying to understand what you are saying. Ottawahitech (talk) 03:42, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable candidate. Most of the article is self-promotion for this guy's soapbox on atheism. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 11:21, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You do not specify why this candidate is not notable. If the article is not neutral that is a different issue, isn't it? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:01, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please review WP:Politician, clause #3. For news coverage there are 79 results from a various sources. Most of these mentions are about his participation in the atheism events, not necessarily as a key organizer. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 13:53, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, he isn't notable as a politician. The debate would be whether he would be notable as an atheist spokesperson for various organizations. --Havermayer (talk) 14:09, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]