Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ilya Sheyman

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 redirect to Illinois's 10th congressional district#2012 election. The firm consensus is that the usual rule in WP:POLITICIAN -- that pages about candidates for office get redirected to the relevant election page -- should apply here. Mkativerata (talk) 19:45, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ilya Sheyman

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

Delete Per Wikipedia notability guidelines on politicians: "an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of 'significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article'" In my opinion, this candidate has not received enough coverage yet to meet the notability requirements. If he is elected, or even if he wins the primary, obviously he would have enough coverage, but currently, the candidate has only received local and blog coverage. Half of all the sources are primary sources, and do not contribute to the notability of the article, while many of the independent articles were all written by the same person. Also, it seems like this article was written by a campaign staffer (although this can be improved through editing). It is my opinion that, at least until the candidate is the subject of substantial independent coverage, that this article should be deleted.

Reason D1245 (talk) 01:52, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to an NPOV article about the 2012 Illinois 10th Congressional District election. We don't need a slew of promotional WP:COI articles about unelected candidates for office. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:28, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I don't really know how to do this.

The redistricting is likely to make IL 10 the most heavily Democrat district held by a Republican in the country and Sheyman is one of two Democrats running in the primary.

Here is more coverage that Sheyman has received. http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/6619748-418/democrats-aim-to-retake-north-shores-10th-congressional-district.html

http://wilmette.patch.com/articles/north-shore-dems-gear-up-for-2012-elections#photo-7172015

http://highlandpark.patch.com/articles/kirk-schakowsky-dold-talk-debt-ceiling-compromise

http://highlandpark.patch.com/articles/sheyman-raises-almost-110k-for-congressional-run

Interesting. But I think that Wikipedia would include the following press as reliable sources:

Chicago Magazine: http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/Felsenthal-Files/June-2011/The-Race-for-the-10th-District-A-Look-at-Ilya-Sheyman/

NBC: http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Crystall-Ball-Says-GOP-to-Lose-Four-Seats-In-Congress-126332858.html

The Associated Press: http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110428/news/110429673/

Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/06/illinois-redistricting-de_n_872142.html

Seattle Times: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2015701407_immigpol24.html

The Hill: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/house-races/171197-rep-dold-raises-big-for-tough-reelection

And also, $110,000 in one quarter is hardly anything to scoff at. It is more than twice as much as Presidential Candidate Buddy Roemer has raised: http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/21/buddy-roemer-announces-presidential-bid/ And no one is itching to delete his presidential campaign section of his wikipedia page

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.15.20.95 (talk) 01:43, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response to IP Editor 216.15.20.95 Speaking personally, and not as a Wikipedia editor, if I lived in Illinois' 10th Congressional District, I might consider supporting Ilya Sheyman for Congress. Also speaking personally, the chance that I will support Buddy Roemer for President is zero. However, speaking as a Wikipedia editor, Buddy Roemer was elected to the House of Representatives and was later elected Governor of Louisiana. Buddy Roemer meets WP:POLITICIAN and Ilya Sheyman, at this point, doesn't. Buddy Roemer is notable by Wikipedia standards and Ilya Sheyman isn't. Here on Wikipedia, we don't have biographies of people running for office who have never been elected to a high office, just because their campaign staffs have sent out a slew of press releases that got reprinted. Instead, we cover such candidacies in neutral articles about the specific race. Those articles cover all the candidates in an even-handed way. Feel free to create an article about the race, that describes all the candidates for that office in a neutral fashion. If you can't bring yourself to do that, then you have a conflict of interest and shouldn't be editing anything pertaining to this race. I wish you well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:38, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, only a few of those articles had Ilya under significant coverage (press releases and other primary sources excluded). And considering multiple sources by the same author are considered one source for notability, you only listed around three sources that can be used for establishing notability. D1245 (talk) 04:08, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't about who you would vote for. The point of this Sun Times article which is 100% a notable and primary source

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/6619748-418/democrats-aim-to-retake-north-shores-10th-congressional-district.html

Is that the IL 10 race in particular is notable at a national level because of the redistricting process. And that Ilya is one of two Democrats running a contested primary. This make Ilya's candidacy itself notable.

I don't have a conflict of interest and I didn't create this page, I saw the marked for deletion note which doesn't make sense.

What I am telling you is that the race is one of the most watched races this cycle, and that Sheyman himself is a notable figure for running a real campaign in this race.

I have looked at the notability rules and Sheyman passes them with ease.

It is important that people are able to find biographical information about Sheyman himself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.15.20.95 (talk) 12:17, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Although you said that the Sun Times article says that this race will be one of the most watched, notability cannot be assigned preemptively. Perhaps if Ilya wins the primary he will receive the coverage necessary for an article, but until then it should be merged into a general election page per Brad Schneider's Page (Ilya's Opponent). D1245 (talk) 01:09, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as easily passing GNG. Redirect as above. The Sun-Times article makes direct and detailing, and the interview in the Chicago Magazine (which is a blog but a professional one) puts this subject past the bar for general notability, therefore WP:POLITICIAN is moot. Lots of national coverage in the links posted by 216.15.20.95, and the two above can't be consider merely as local (unless appearing in the NYT or New Yorker are likewise local sources). I'm going to source this page better. Please allow me a period of time in which to source this before closing. BusterD (talk) 01:08, 6 August 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, Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I agree with BusterD. Not just local coverage, but nation wide, he clearly notable. Dream Focus 05:07, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WP:POLITICIAN is never moot when discussing a candidate who has received press attention only because of his candidacy. This candidate should be discussed in an article about the specific race that includes neutral coverage of all the candidates. That's the only way to ensure the neutral point of view, which is one of our most important policies. It can be summarized as "Articles mustn't take sides, but should explain the sides, fairly and without bias." All of the coverage mentioned above is utterly routine for a congressional candidate with a competent staff. They send out press releases and the local papers print some of them. Much is being made of his "national" coverage, yet the Seattle Times coverage is a reprint from the Chicago Tribune that mentions him only in passing. Coverage in The Hill is half a sentence, and that's a specialist publication for political junkies like me, not a general circulation publication. The NBC coverage is by the local Chicago affiliate and not national. The Associated Press coverage was printed in the Daily Herald, a suburban Chicago area paper. There is no significant coverage in the national press. It is all routine and in passing. There is no reason whatsoever to depart from WP:POLITICIAN in this case. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:01, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:POLITICIAN. All coverage consists of information relating to campaign announcements, endorsements so far, etc. We specifically avoid having articles on these kind of routine candidates; jeez people, at least wait until the primary. Candidates in elections always get routine coverage, that's why POLITICIAN specifies what is needed. Yaksar (let's chat) 05:45, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Cullen is probably right about the redirect here.--Yaksar (let's chat) 05:50, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The fact that there's significant discussion here is also notable regarding the article's relevance and notability.Northamerica1000 (talk) 10:11, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh god no. If having an intense discussion in an AfD proved the notability of a topic, well, I shudder to think what this encyclopedia would be made of (articles like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/11/11/11 would be the least of our worries).--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:34, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm withdrawing my rescue attempt. I spent part of a day looking in the NYPL for offline sources, but couldn't find anything significant. After reading User:Cullen328's points above, I have to admit I couldn't find anything at all (outside of blogs) which pre-dates the subject's announcement. Sorry, squadron, I let you down. I could clean up the page, but I couldn't make the page meet WP:POLITICIAN. Everything I found relates directly toward this election process. Subject is reputed to be a "Kossak" but only 31 posts by him in Daily Kos doesn't make him seem a significant enough blogger. Perfectly worthy subject, but especially since his primary opponent's page has been similarly redirected, better to not take sides myself. Again, sorry to those I might have disappointed. BusterD (talk) 19:51, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He does get coverage for other things. http://www.vpr.net/news_detail/83278/ "Ilya Sheyman of the group True Majority was among demonstrators who rallied in Burlington." They quote him there in 12/17/08.
Got coverage for his "AP State Scholar awards" "Daily Herald : Column: The briefs $2.95 - Daily Herald - NewsBank - Dec 12, 2004"
Was getting political even in high school and getting coverage for it. "Daily Herald: A practical civics lesson $2.95 - Daily Herald - NewsBank - Oct 31, 2002 Stevenson High School student Ilya Sheyman addresses Buffalo Grove village board members Monday during the annual Civics Forum This year's topic was the ..." Dream Focus 22:49, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A trivial passing mention and a two sentence sound bite in brief radio coverage of a protest demonstration, and passing mentions of a high school student by the suburban newspaper covering the town where he lived. Are you really arguing that this is significant coverage? By your standard, millions of Americans are notable enough for Wikipedia articles, including pretty much every single candidate for office anywhere. By that logic, we may as well scrap WP:POLITICIAN if it wasn't for the fact that it's the product of consensus. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:30, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Cullen, but specifically those sources do not pass WP:EVENT criteria. D1245 (talk) 23:35, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:POLITICIAN. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:15, 11 August 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.