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. Hut 8.5 21:07, 31 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Aleko Elisashvili

Aleko Elisashvili (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Fails WP:POLITICIAN Arthistorian1977 ( talk) 21:58, 16 July 2017 (UTC) reply

this is one of four main candidates for the third most important elected position in Georgia, in what will be the most important election in 2017 -- the candidate is receiving increasing coverage in English, too (there is very wide coverage in Georgian), I started this when he announced his candidacy. (Note that I am in no way connected.) I would appreciate if you give it/me a bit more time, and remove the deletion notice. Hundnase ( talk) 04:29, 17 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 22:11, 16 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 22:11, 16 July 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete. As yet unelected candidates in future elections do not get Wikipedia articles just for the fact of being candidates per se — if you cannot demonstrate and properly source that he was already notable enough for an article for some other reason besides the candidacy, then he does not become notable enough for an article until he wins the election. Tbilisi is quite obviously a large and important enough city that he'd qualify for an article if he wins the mayoralty, so no prejudice against recreation on or after election day if that happens, but merely being a candidate for mayor as of today is not enough for a Wikipedia article. Bearcat ( talk) 22:26, 18 July 2017 (UTC) reply
• Keep. On candidates, I agree, but this makes more sense for elections where there are lots of jokester candidates. He is one candidate out of four, and thus is receiving coverage and attention, and is notable, in ways that any random candidate is not. Yet even beyond that, he is notable -- he has been a central figure in a major scandal/allegation in Georgia, for which I now have added more material. Taken together, I think this justifies keeping him. Hundnase ( talk) 17:27, 21 July 2017 (UTC) reply

It's not our role to judge whether a candidacy is "serious" or a "joke" — either a person is a candidate or they're not, period. We apply no subjective tests to determine whose candidacies are more or less "serious" than whose — and we extend notability, for the purposes of getting a Wikipedia article, only to (a) the winner, and/or (b) people who can be properly shown to have already qualified for an article for some other reason anyway. By the way...you know who else's candidacy was considered a joke by a lot of serious people quite recently? This guy. Bearcat ( talk) 21:11, 23 July 2017 (UTC) reply

guys, it's fully understood that being a candidate by itself is NOT enough to be notable. Yet this should not mean that ALL candidates automatically should be deleted. Plus, please check the article. The guy IS notable, he has been a/the leading urban activist, and the chair of the Presidential commission on pardons -- that is a major and notable role, with national importance, plus a key figure in a major issue/scandal. I have added these to the entry. English language coverage in media is not 100%, so these sources are not (yet) perfect. I am working to make more substantive info available from Georgia, and would regret if major public figures are eradicated. Then the reaction of people will be -- ok, why bother, people from other countries like to shoot down when we try to document stuff on Wikipedia, since we don't have tons of English-language media. Here is a screenshot from the site that best covers Georgia in English, illustrating 49 items with his name, suggesting a fair degree of notability, across the years.

Thanks for appropriate consideration Hundnase ( talk) 20:40, 24 July 2017 (UTC) reply

There is no rule that the sources for a Wikipedia article have to be in English — foreign language sources are allowed to be used. Whatever language the sources are in, however, there is a rule that they have to adequately support passage of a defined notability criterion — for instance, a source doesn't assist in getting a person over WP:GNG if it just namechecks his existence as a bit player or a giver of soundbite rather than being substantively about him, and nearly all of the sources in your screenshot are the former rather than the latter. Playing a role in exposing a scandal, frex, doesn't speak to his notability just because his name appears in coverage of the scandal — he would have to be the subject of the media coverage, not just a name that appears in coverage of other people, before it assisted in building notability. Bearcat ( talk) 15:31, 25 July 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete While some levels of candidates may be notable for such, city mayor candidates are not such. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 05:21, 24 July 2017 (UTC) reply
• Delete: per Johnpacklambert. Definitely fails WP:NPOLITICIAN and WP:GNG. DrStrauss talk 16:47, 31 July 2017 (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.