Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Bortz

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. joe decker ^{talk to me} 02:30, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Bortz

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

being a member of Cincinnati City Council since 2005 does not seem to confer notability? Teapotgeorge^Talk 20:46, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. — —Tom Morris (talk) 23:01, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 23:07, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep--actually, it does. See WP:POLITICIAN #2, "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage.[7] Generally speaking, mayors of cities of at least regional importance are likely to meet this criterion, as are members of the main citywide government or council of a major metropolitan city." Bortz easily passes this test--do a google news search on "Chris Bortz Cincinnati" and there are plenty of reliable sources. I'll try to add some references now, but even without them, this calls for a cleanup tag, not a deletion. Meelar (talk) 19:05, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment--I've significantly updated the article and added several citations to reliable sources. Meelar (talk) 20:11, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Adequate sources are showing in the piece. The subject's minor party ties make him rather more noteworthy than your run of the mill city councilor, but that's icing on a big-enough cake. Carrite (talk) 00:05, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In order to make a valid argument for deletion under WP:POLITICIAN, one would have to assert that Cincinatti is not a "major metropolitan city". It seems to me that this is a tough argument to make. I suggest that the nominator, who I am sure was acting in good faith, read the relevant and applicable notability guidelines before making further AfD nominations. Cullen328 (talk) 06:11, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did read WP:POLITICIAN I didn't think he qualified as "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage." but I'm happy for it to remain if he qualifies under "major metropolitan city" Teapotgeorge^Talk 07:37, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HOTTIE. Voyager640 (talk) 14:04, 21 July 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.