Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ross Eadie

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:56, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ross Eadie

(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)

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

Delete. While consensus did once accept Winnipeg as prominent enough to hand its city councillors an WP:NPOL pass just for serving on city council, the original basis for that consensus (its presence in one of the lists of cities that were formerly present in global city) is no longer true. Current consensus on a number of recent AFDs has now deprecated Winnipeg as not internationally significant enough to hand its city councillors any special status anymore, as it was listed in the "self-sufficiency" class of "honourable mentions", and is not actually classed as a "global city" per se by any external source either. And none of these articles is sourced remotely well enough to pass WP:GNG either. Bearcat (talk) 17:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Manitoba-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:15, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per Bearcat and newly established consensus on council members from Winnipeg. - Enos733 (talk) 03:17, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – These could be merged to Winnipeg City Council, which would enhance and improve that article by providing more information and context about these subjects. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:56, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They're all already named (and current committee assignments already listed in the notes table) in that article, and there's not really any reliably sourced content in any of these articles that would add anything noteworthy beyond what's already present in that list. Bearcat (talk) 06:00, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Redirect, delete or merge? Sandstein 10:53, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:53, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all consensus can change, and in this case it seems to have changed to reject city council members from this place as default notable. I would hold the same position on city council members from Des Moines, Iowa and other cities in the US of similar to Winnepeg global impact.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:07, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Who are these people, anyway? --Buick Century Driver 05:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

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.