Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allison Kolb

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. John254 02:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Allison Kolb

An auditor, defeated in a bid for his party's nomination. Guy (Help!) 21:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An auditor, defeated in a bid for his party's nomination. Which is grounds for an article to be kept around!!! Did you just submit this for fun? William Anderson (User:Wanderson9) 23:18, 16 December 2007 (GMT) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.227.165.25 (talk)

I struck out the sig since the comment wasn't actually made by User:Wanderson9 but by an IP. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 23:25, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the lists of Louisiana-related deletions, Politicians-related deletions, and History-related deletions. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Louisiana for a list of related AfDs of articles by the same editor. --A. B. ^(talk) 23:40, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It could do with in-line citations but otherwise it appears to meet WP:V and WP:N. Billscottbob (talk) 04:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
KeepAllison Kolb wasthe State Auditor an elected statewide official at the time1(even today the Louisiana Legislative Auditor who is appointed by the Legislature Is very powerful)--Looktothis (talk) 15:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Disproportionate coverage, of no concern to a general encyclopedia. we need a Louisiana Wikia for material like this. mention in one book, and the rest are primary sources and an uncritical obit. DGG (talk) 07:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Guy and DGG. Fails WP:BIO. Eusebeus (talk) 16:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Per WP:BIO, statewide elected officials are granted a presumption of inherent notabilty ("Politicians who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislature"). the ample reliable and verifiable sources provided here clearly satisfy the Wikipedia:Notability standard. It completely strains credulity to claim that this article fails WP:BIO, and that an admin would be ignorant of this clear claim of notability only adds to the damage. Alansohn (talk) 20:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and format the references better. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:16, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep being a state auditor is not a trivial position. Would we delete all the articles for all these former Irish Ministers of State (finance)? Of course not. Former Ministers of Finance and Personnel in Northern Ireland? Probably not. So if Louisiana is bigger than Ireland and much bigger than Northern Ireland, why is it necessary to delete articles about state auditors? Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia -- if an article is properly sourced and of historical interest, then let's keep it. So what if only people in Cork, Belfast and New Orleans are interested in these respective histories -- we still provide a useful historical resource (and don't even get me started on our zillions of articles about professional wrestling, manga and Pokemon). --A. B. ^(talk) 23:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BIO and User:Alansohn. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 10:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In all honesty, it shows a pretty low understanding of the notability guidelines presenting this article for deletion (sorry Guy if this may sound harsh, but I think you botched this one badly).--Aldux (talk) 18:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I think Guy made an honest mistake, too, but I appreciate how hard he has tried to work with Billy on these articles, so I'd hardly say Guy "botched" it. I know Billy looked at a lot of sources when he was writing his thesis and I wish he'd just cite them in all these articles that keep going to AfD. Sources don't have to be available on line -- old newspaper clippings work, too. There are more of Billy's articles I'd like to keep but we really can't work just on his say-so, any more than Wikipedia can accept mine or yours. --A. B. ^(talk) 18:48, 20 December 2007 (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.