521:"'RETAIN'" This article should be retained and linked to the existing wikipedia article about the office of the borough president. The borough president wikipedia entry details how the position has had its significant powers eroded over time. However, the entry fails to mention that there is an ongoing controversy about whether the office should exist at all. This case has been made by Mr. Casavis, by editorial writers of the New York Daily News and New York Post, and, previously, by Barry Popik. This point of view is unusual enough to deserve attention and Mr. Casavis merits an entry himself and a link to a proposed new controversy section of the borough president article along with Barry Popik (already the subject of a wikipedia entry), for their respective roles in the continuing debate.
645:
minor municipal office because nobody else in his party was willing, and he lost badly. He's running for another municipal office under about the same conditions. If by any miracle he wins, he might become notable. But I notice the people who want to "retain" thearticle are saying, imo correctly, that the office he is running for isn't even very important This is a very highly promotional article, very close to a G11, and even taking the claims at their face value, he isn't notable. Knowledge (XXG) is not the place for political advertising.
218:
357:"non-notable" is equivalent to supporting his opponent and is a violation of campaign finance laws that could risk Knowledge (XXG)'s 501c status. A statement that he is non-notable is subjective. Based on his ballot status he is note-worthy. Any discussion of the 2009 race for Manhattan Borough President is incomplete and inaccurate without reference to Casavis. --
440:– GB fan, well put and needless to say I agree with you. I am always amazed at the number of people that think that one or another Knowledge (XXG) guideline amounts to something that is actionable in the legal system. I am even more amazed at the misinterpretation of established laws by laypersons. ImmoveableGroove I suggest you read
572:
media, the first page alone shows media such as New York Press, NBCNewYork.com and
Politickerny.com. Should Knowledge (XXG) have thorough coverage of politics where thoughtful people can get a complete picture or should it present only a superficial picture that one could get from a soundbite on the 6:00 news?
414:. I have looked and I can not find significant coverage of Casavis in reliable sources. If you are able to find some, let me know and I will reevaluate my opinion based on the new information. I don't think Knowledge (XXG)'s 501c status is threatened because someone who does not meet the long established
644:
One thing he is certainly not, and that is a noted scholar. He doesn't have a doctorate. He has no academic publications. He's taught a course as an adjunct at a few colleges. He has written a few articles, and a large number of book reviews. As for politics: according to the article, he ran for a
571:
a search on Gotham
Gazette alone returns 10 articles that reference Casavis. If you don't think Gotham Gazette is a major publication then you aren't familiar with politics and government in New York. A web search returns 1800 articles and while of course many are things like Facebook and minor
356:
David
Casavis has earned a place on the ballot by virtue of collecting thousands of signatures from NYC voters. So he is a valid candidate by virtue of New York Election Law. Removing this article because Casavis isn't sufficiently covered by mainstream media or because someone finds him
473:
From what I can tell, the campaign has only begun, but the candidate in question is cited in many news sources. Just
Googling brings up a couple of pages. Perhaps he is not a household word over in GB, but here in NYC he is an established candidate with a major
615:) As you indicated the majority of articles are "things like Facebook and minor media". In addition, the other articles do not amount to significant coverage. If you can provide specific evidence the article meets the criteria in
495:– True there are a few pages of hits; however, as stated in the nomination, the hits lack substance. They are short references and entries in blogs. He may be an established candidate in NYC, but it appears he is lacking the
156:
448:, your comment treads a bit too close to a violation of that policy. Let us remember that lack is notability is the issue at hand. I will repeat, notability needs to be established to survive this AfD.
410:. None of the reasons you say he is notable are included in any of these guidelines. For the most part notability as far as Knowledge (XXG) is concerned comes down to one thing, significant coverage in
561:– The existence of another article (i.e., Barry Popik) is not a justification for existence of this article. Each article must stand on its own merit and satisfy Knowledge (XXG) criteria for inclusion.
117:
225:
613:
398:. You are correct that notability is subjective and the English Knowledge (XXG) has detailed what makes someone notable. Notability on Knowledge (XXG) starts off with the
150:
594:
379:
234:
612:– A search on ("David Casavis" "Gotham Gazette") only shows one article and a Google web search of ("David Casavis") only show 252. (see
598:
547:
383:
264:
17:
90:
85:
94:
403:
543:
77:
250:
171:
394:
Wikpedia is not the place for political campaigns to take place. Knowledge (XXG) is an encyclopedia that has articles on
138:
445:
671:
36:
590:
577:
375:
362:
223:
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
187:
Non-notable candidate for local office. Lacks GNews and GHITS of substance to support article. Appears to fail
296:
670:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
132:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
616:
586:
573:
496:
407:
399:
371:
358:
280:
254:
188:
656:
632:
581:
530:
512:
483:
479:
461:
426:
366:
346:
208:
128:
59:
539:
526:
239:
81:
178:
535:
522:
164:
73:
65:
286:
217:
402:
guideline that is the overarching guideline for all articles. This is then refined for people,
628:
508:
475:
457:
204:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
192:
144:
411:
335:
55:
415:
395:
652:
441:
620:
500:
449:
314:
302:
270:
196:
111:
249:
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
420:
340:
50:
647:
406:. In that guideline there is even a specific section about politicians,
664:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
418:
guidelines that all articles are subject to, is not included.
212:
243:(agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments,
233:
among
Knowledge (XXG) contributors. Knowledge (XXG) has
107:
103:
99:
163:
177:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
674:). No further edits should be made to this page.
263:Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected
8:
334:Can't find significant coverage of him in
237:regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
257:on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
442:The Hoover Institution-Campaign Finance
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
404:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (people)
24:
446:Knowledge (XXG):No legal threats
216:
347:22:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
209:14:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
1:
253:on the part of others and to
657:05:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
633:22:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
582:21:34, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
531:17:23, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
513:21:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
484:20:51, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
462:02:55, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
444:. I also suggest you read
427:13:29, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
367:13:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
60:06:00, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
691:
400:Knowledge (XXG):Notability
667:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
499:to support an article.
295:; accounts blocked for
265:single-purpose accounts
235:policies and guidelines
619:it will be retained.
599:few or no other edits
548:few or no other edits
384:few or no other edits
601:outside this topic.
550:outside this topic.
386:outside this topic.
247:by counting votes.
226:not a majority vote
44:The result was
602:
551:
387:
328:
327:
324:
251:assume good faith
682:
669:
625:
587:ImmoveableGroove
584:
574:ImmoveableGroove
533:
505:
454:
423:
412:reliable sources
396:notable subjects
372:ImmoveableGroove
369:
359:ImmoveableGroove
343:
336:reliable sources
322:
310:
294:
278:
259:
229:, but instead a
220:
213:
201:
182:
181:
167:
115:
97:
34:
690:
689:
685:
684:
683:
681:
680:
679:
678:
672:deletion review
665:
621:
501:
450:
421:
341:
312:
300:
284:
268:
255:sign your posts
197:
124:
88:
72:
69:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
688:
686:
677:
676:
660:
659:
638:
637:
636:
635:
604:
603:
565:
564:
563:
562:
553:
552:
518:
517:
516:
515:
487:
486:
467:
466:
465:
464:
432:
431:
430:
429:
389:
388:
350:
349:
326:
325:
221:
185:
184:
121:
68:
63:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
687:
675:
673:
668:
662:
661:
658:
654:
650:
649:
643:
642:Strong Delete
640:
639:
634:
630:
626:
624:
618:
617:WP:POLITICIAN
614:
611:
608:
607:
606:
605:
600:
596:
592:
588:
583:
579:
575:
570:
567:
566:
560:
557:
556:
555:
554:
549:
545:
541:
537:
532:
528:
524:
520:
519:
514:
510:
506:
504:
498:
494:
491:
490:
489:
488:
485:
481:
477:
472:
469:
468:
463:
459:
455:
453:
447:
443:
439:
436:
435:
434:
433:
428:
425:
424:
417:
413:
409:
408:WP:POLITICIAN
405:
401:
397:
393:
392:
391:
390:
385:
381:
377:
373:
368:
364:
360:
355:
352:
351:
348:
345:
344:
337:
333:
330:
329:
320:
316:
308:
304:
298:
292:
288:
282:
276:
272:
266:
262:
258:
256:
252:
246:
242:
241:
236:
232:
228:
227:
222:
219:
215:
214:
211:
210:
206:
202:
200:
194:
190:
189:WP:POLITICIAN
180:
176:
173:
170:
166:
162:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
130:
127:
126:Find sources:
122:
119:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
74:David Casavis
71:
70:
67:
66:David Casavis
64:
62:
61:
57:
53:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
666:
663:
646:
641:
622:
609:
568:
558:
502:
492:
476:Sallieparker
470:
451:
437:
422:~~ GB fan ~~
419:
353:
342:~~ GB fan ~~
339:
331:
318:
306:
297:sockpuppetry
290:
279:; suspected
274:
260:
248:
244:
238:
230:
224:
198:
186:
174:
168:
160:
153:
147:
141:
135:
125:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
597:) has made
546:) has made
382:) has made
151:free images
497:notability
416:notability
231:discussion
536:Konakid04
523:Konakid04
287:canvassed
281:canvassed
240:consensus
595:contribs
544:contribs
380:contribs
319:username
313:{{subst:
307:username
301:{{subst:
291:username
285:{{subst:
275:username
269:{{subst:
118:View log
610:Comment
559:Comment
493:Comment
438:Comment
283:users:
157:WP refs
145:scholar
91:protect
86:history
623:ttonyb
569:Retain
503:ttonyb
474:party.
471:RETAIN
452:ttonyb
354:RETAIN
332:Delete
199:ttonyb
193:WP:BIO
129:Google
95:delete
46:delete
653:talk
261:Note:
172:JSTOR
133:books
112:views
104:watch
100:links
16:<
629:talk
591:talk
578:talk
540:talk
527:talk
509:talk
480:talk
458:talk
376:talk
363:talk
205:talk
191:and
165:FENS
139:news
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
56:talk
51:Cirt
648:DGG
338:.
315:csp
311:or
303:csm
271:spa
245:not
179:TWL
116:– (
655:)
631:)
593:•
585:—
580:)
542:•
534:—
529:)
511:)
482:)
460:)
378:•
370:—
365:)
321:}}
309:}}
299::
293:}}
277:}}
267::
207:)
195:.
159:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
58:)
48:.
651:(
627:(
589:(
576:(
538:(
525:(
507:(
478:(
456:(
374:(
361:(
323:.
317:|
305:|
289:|
273:|
203:(
183:)
175:·
169:·
161:·
154:·
148:·
142:·
136:·
131:(
123:(
120:)
114:)
76:(
54:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.