Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Carter (politician)

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 no consensus. Spartaz ^Humbug! 14:26, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Carter (politician)

Jack Carter (politician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. User:Aaronw1109 stated very succinctly in 2018, Given that he's done nothing notable, besides be the parent of a Georgia state senator, the son of a President, and a failed Senate candidate, does this article pass WP:GNG?. The answer is no. KidAd talk 23:12, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:21, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:21, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:22, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:22, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:22, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:23, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Jimmy Carter. Children of US Presidents must pass WP:GNG or another SNG to merit inclusion. --Enos733 (talk) 00:27, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as unremarkable as it may be, I do believe his biography and status as son of Jimmy Carter warrant him to stay.--BestOnLifeform (talk) 04:23, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Any specific policy to support this, or just WP:ILIKEIT? KidAd talk 04:31, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - notablity is not hereditary Nathan811 (talk) 07:23, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - as above, notablity is not hereditary -- Whiteguru (talk) 12:13, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep Normally we would look to WP:POLOUTCOMES for a guide. But the children of U.S. presidents are like American royalty. (See William and Harry) Children of presidents get national coverage for nearly everything they do. Many above have said WP:NOTINHERITED but this candidate - by virtue of his birthright, passes WP:N with multiple reliable sources. It is hard to deny multiple articles in the New York Times and other national media. Wm335td (talk) 17:38, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Carter is not royalty of any kind. Not a policy. KidAd talk 17:45, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I suggested on the talk page nearly 3 years ago why this article should be deleted, but forgot to AfD it myself. My reasons for voting delete are on the talk page. Same as in NOM. –Aaronw1109 ^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:28, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, like it or not, seems to have gotten high profile press. Hyperbolick (talk) 02:07, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Out of the six sources listed, which are classified as "high profile press"? Which are non-trivial campaign mentions? KidAd talk 02:09, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many sources are not in the article: WP:NEXIST. Wm335td (talk) 02:13, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

However, once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive, especially if time passes and actual proof does not surface. KidAd talk 02:34, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. My WP:BEFORE found many sources. I added a few from major media. In addition there are New York Times and every major news media available. Wm335td (talk) 18:56, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, in addition to his senate run, he also received coverage for his discharge from the navy for smoking marijuana, as can be seen in this New York Times article from 1977: [1] This clearly assuages any BLP1E concerns and causes him to pass WP:GNG effortlessly, and if I could find this with a 30 second search, than it is just WP:COMMONSENSE that there is far more out there. Devonian Wombat (talk) 00:38, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep New sources found by Devonian Wombat show he is probably notable Spudlace (talk) 15:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete failed senate candidates are not notable for such and we do not have enough sourcing about him otherwise.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:17, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Not notable because of familial ties (WP:INVALIDBIO). Not notable because of unsuccessful Senatorial candidacy (WP:NPOL). A basic WP:BEFORE (hampered as it is by other people sharing the same name) turns up nothing I would characterize as substantial depth of coverage as mandated by WP:BASIC – instead, what I find is coverage of his run for Senate (i.e. the 2006 United States Senate election in Nevada), a bunch of passing mentions in articles about his father, and the above-mentioned coverage for being discharged from the Navy for smoking cannabis (the idea that this article, which was written 7 years after the fact when his father faced more scrutiny from the media and which goes into basically no depth at all, counts as substantial depth of coverage is absurd to me). I don't think the combined coverage from these sources adds up to substantial depth of coverage of the person, so I don't find any indication that he passes WP:NBIO. If we are to redirect this anywhere, I suggest 2006 United States Senate election in Nevada as the target. TompaDompa (talk) 21:21, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, He failed in the elections so he fails notability. Alex-h (talk) 11:16, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I think we're jumping to conclusions on his notability because of the hereditary element and the losing political campaign element, which aren't enough on their own, but there's plenty of WP:GNG-qualifying national coverage from the campaign, which wouldn't be enough on its own, but also other sources, including an endorsement he made for Barack Obama. As someone not quite as famous as his father, he's always going to be "the son," but he has been written about enough by secondary sources to be eligible for an article. SportingFlyer T·C 21:34, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Devonian Wombat, failing in an election alone can not conclusively make someone non-notable. --☆★Mamushir (✉✉) 16:55, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:GNG. Winning an election does not make one notable, and losing an election does not make one non-notable. Bearian (talk) 19:03, 9 October 2020 (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.