Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Heise

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 Mises Caucus. The SPLC source is roughly acceptable and the Reason video is of rather high quality and usefulness, but the rest of the references only mention Michael Heise in passing in reference to the caucus. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 11:36, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Heise

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

non-notable party founder - while there's some minor coverage, there is nothing significant and the party itself is of little notability as it's an off shoot of two major parties. PRAXIDICAE🌈 18:41, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Libertarian Party (United States) is the third largest party in the United States, and this person is the founder of the caucus that now controls the messaging and party as a whole. A short, or stub article at minimum is both notable and reasonable. The sources provided two are on the RS list as well, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 18:46, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't coverage of him though, it's all about the party. Redirect it to the caucus but he isn't notable on his own. PRAXIDICAE🌈 18:56, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At least one or more of the RSes cited is entirely devoted to coverage of Michael Heise and the recent LP Mises Caucus majority. This article should be retained. Pulpfiction621 (talk) 20:10, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

which would that be? isn't about him, this is basically an interview with little editorial content, not about him, not about him, probably the most significant information about him but still not in depth coverage. PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:57, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Pennsylvania. Shellwood (talk) 19:03, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete limited notability, few independent sources. Andre🚐 21:31, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
None of the sources are primary or written by the subject. What do you mean by "independent" sources then? ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 02:30, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Per Praxidicae, the Reason source is basically an interview with him. Reason also has a close connection to the Libertarian movement. So this is pretty softball coverage of him. There seems to be really only one decent piece of information about him in the list above which is SPLC, which is a counter-party to him, but all in all, still feels like a delete, not very notable. Andre🚐 18:37, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per questions asked of users above. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 02:40, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Libertarianism-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 08:26, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Praxidicae and Andre. There just isn't enough WP:RS-compliant significant coverage here to satisfy WP:GNG. Sal2100 (talk) 19:15, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Don't see anything about him outside of the party activities, meetings, etc., nothing biographical, no background. The 3 "Reason" articles are to be counted as one (as per wp:n), but we still only get mentions. Lamona (talk) 20:14, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding this notion of "mentions", from the GNG policy itself, it is worth pointing out that, "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." That also discounts that some of these, such as the Nick Gillespie piece, is solely and entirely covering Heise. Given his position in that movement, and the coverage from the Southern Poverty Law Center. This should merit inclusion. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 22:14, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For the umpteenth time, the SPLC source is an opinion editorial, and as such cannot be considered to be a reliable source. Rather, it is simply the opinion of that author. Curbon7 (talk) 23:15, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is my view that this is a very important article to keep since the Libertarian Party is the third largest party and it seems as though the Mises Caucus faction has retained control of how the party operates for the near future. Michael Heise is going to be an ongoing relevant figure for this party, particularly in the 2024 presidential election when it is likely that the Mises Caucus will have an outsized sway on who they select to be the party nominee. I also disagree with some of the claims that a lot of there is an issue with the sources, Reason, Washington Post, and the SPLC are all RSes as far as I know and after listening the Reason interview, it seems as though they are actually challenging his claims and could hardly be called soft ball coverage. I think that as time goes on and the election gets closer, there will be even more RSes that we can use to expand and strengthen this page. I believe it should be kept. Pulpfiction621 (talk) 14:48, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Almost none of your statement is rooted in policy. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball; we can't predict who may become notable. Also, the SPLC source is not reliable, as it is an opinion editorial. Curbon7 (talk) 14:51, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Notability is largely WP:INHERITED from Mises Caucus. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:43, 19 August 2022 (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.