461:
selected from having been in public life prior to the election. They were notables. Of those three, only the incumbent was a regularly featured media darling. One of the others was a standing city alderman --a minor notable whose Wiki page was added for the 2006 election's informational purposes and earned 32 per cent of the popular vote as a runner-up-- who, as it turned out during the election, had prepared no cogent platform at all; but apparently only wanted to replace a mayor she disliked enough to run against him and try to formulate a platform on the fly. Eventually, the media stopped covering her candidacy. The other had little or no previous media exposure prior to 2002, but had been the president of a political party from 1998 to 2004 --another minor notable who earned 1.3 per cent of the popular vote, but came in at third place. His Wiki article was posted in the year following the 2006 civic election in 2007 at the moment he was hired by a local talk radio station as a show host. His frequent public remonstrations made to the press during the election that he had no intention of actually wanting to become mayor and that he was only in the race to put down the incumbent’s competency, and his obdurate refusal to offer any platforms during the campaigning process also resulted in their dropping him from their election-hijacking list of whom the citizenry should vote for. In both cases, the number of votes (actually, due to having been dropped as favourites by the local media, fewer than their candidacies might have otherwise earned) received was not a relevant factor. Only the attention of a great deal of press during the period of the election (see my article re the shunning of all thirty five shunned candidates in press coverage) actually created a NOTABLE figure worthy of entry in
Knowledge. By your current criteria, therefore, Wiki notables are chosen by the press.
469:
my invention and opinions on local transit matters have their own web pages in addition to my running a political commentary with a growing readership via my home URL; and various internet pages published by others, including
Knowledge (in its review of the last civic election) make mention of me. I have also been a media person: news director at a CBC network affiliate station; and occupied a number of volunteer positions including the first ever visiting hospital clown at the venerable old Toronto General Hospital and a year as marketing director for the Toronto Distress Centers. As a school teacher, my curricula were considered remarkable enough to merit a personal invitation to join the graduate faculty of Environmental Studies at York, during which years the Ontario Ministry of Education requested me to give a curriculum development summer course to graduating-year teacher librarians. In architectural practice, I spoke on behalf of petitioning clients to various committees of adjustment, and never lost a case. As a Marine Engineer I designed new aeration systems for a wild fish hatchery in Ontario, was requested by a local automobile hubcap manufacturer to suggest a new design for their cooling systems, and offered a critique to a city committee regarding its waste-disposal systems while employed as a VP of engineering and marketing with a Brampton firm, and shortly thereafter authored the major invention currently in process before the USPTO of a new variety of electrical generating station. While being worthwhile and publicly-oriented, none of these activities meets the criteria of being 'notable' because it did not impress the media reportage enough to run sufficient stories about it to make me newsworthy and hence notable to the protectors of Wikintegrity.
450:
accomplishment are not criteria for notability; and again sadly, there is no sub-category in the rules of acceptance entitled “temporary notability”. This elimination of notability possibility includes a past candidate labeled as ‘fringe’ because he/she has not been chosen as a ‘front runner’ by public media; and/or by some of you who believe that by dint of not receiving a lot of votes during an election, a candidacy then labelled as fringe becomes irrelevant regardless of its content simply because of the number of votes cast for him/her during an election in which they stepped forward as citizens to run for office. In the 2006 elections for
Toronto’s Mayor, there were 38 candidates (some of whom stepped forward out of anticipation of having a chance to win due to an unpopular incumbent); and as it happens, you conclusively showed in your postings’ references to the current Knowledge rules as you have interpreted them that in Toronto in 2006, only the three media-favoured contenders were 'noteworthy' due to having been a media topic. Neither the quality of their candidacy, its importance, or its relevance were used as criteria to post those candidates on Knowledge: merely their quantity of media appearances. It would seem that the media’s well-known propensity for hijacking elections, as I'll illustrate below, is a determinant both as to which former candidates were worthy of the public’s cast ballots through deliberate shunning of the rest; and --as has been tacitly seconded by those defending the criteria for the category of ‘notability’-- a criterion as to whom to admit for selection in this regard.
453:“Temporary notability” might include posting in a forum similar in composition to the Knowledge Toronto 2006 post-election coverage that would at least be accessible to the public; and through which they could (at least during the course of the election) examine the favourable or unfavourable aspects of those potential or actual candidates in their elections about whom they would like more information from a factual source, and without depending solely on news stories --or the lack thereof. Going to Knowledge for bio and/or platform information seems a reasonable course of action.
339:
persons who have followed the same course as I by posting an article in here so that
Torontonians may read about the person who will eventually show up --should they follow through and actually run-- in a reliable resource. The article contains biographical information and concerns that I may raise when I actually enter the race.
270:
contributor, the subject or both. Better to delete the vanity pages of those wishing to star in their own reality series than a page devoted to a
Canadian politician (whose municipal issues website cited on the Wiki page makes no mention of his candidacy) which observes proper Wiki protocols for footnoting and external links.
517:
However, there is still a possibility that objections may be raised in this area. I would truly appreciate it if, should those kinds of objections come up, they be made with specific references so that corrections can be made. When I next post this article, I would like to have it in as presentable
342:
Before the race begins, however, there will be a fair amount of media publicity surrounding those who have said they intend to run. It's only fair that people who read about these potential candidates have an opportunity to find out something about them. Telling them about me and my ideas regarding
480:
It’s my conclusion, therefore, that I have to temporarily withdraw the article at this time and re-enter it at a later date after the published and/or broadcast media have endorsed my presence and made it thusly acceptable to the objectors. While it's off, I shall request its contributing editor to
476:
These are the same critera of 'notability' exercised in the choice of offered candidates being held by those wishing this article deleted. In other words, those critera do not give me enough 'notability' to cover me due to my past activities; although they may in future ones if the press likes me.
468:
I'm not a notable by life contribution criteria. I have authored numerous articles on a number of topics --albeit either as a contributor or a commentator in other persons' web opinion columns, either by choice or invitation-- in various media via the internet. In the non-commentator article list,
338:
In
November 2010, there will be another civic election, in which I have indicated I INTEND to run for the Mayor's office. As no candidate is permitted to campaign before the registration date of January 4th, 2010, I am only permitted before that time to indicate my potential candidacy, as are other
328:
First of all, the citing of Google as a resource. When I typed in the same key words, I also found the story about the
Detroit Mayor, and nothing --certainly nothing immediate-- about myself. However, in using other search terms, such as my name, my website, and so-on, I found on Google 9 articles
488:
Just sitting in defense of a dogma isn't as challenging as thinking of other ways to make it viable in justifiable circumstances. Especially since the dogma needs bolstering in this area in order to help maintain
Knowledge's relevance...not as a news purveyor, but as a bona fide, up-to-date, and
449:
Second, and sadly, it seems (with the exception of history books) to be up to the popular media to determine who is notable enough to merit positioning in the
Knowledge. That a person may be a candidate for Mayor in one of the world’s major cities and has lived a life of some contribution and/or
269:
The giant smacking sound of
Knowledge abuse is also present in DarkAudit's entry, which happily ignores that under his criterion, Wiki abuse has occurred millions of times and continues to plague the site every day. Self-promotion is the hallmark of a huge percentage of Wiki pages, either for the
460:
In the 2006 election, only Knowledge through its careful research discovered and highlighted the platforms of all the candidates; and then only after the conclusion of the election. Of the three candidates presented to the public by the Toronto media as those for whom they should vote, all were
513:
I have been over the article myself. Before being posted after I become 'notable', it will undergo editorial changes from its contributing editor Hezbollatte. But in the meantime, the content of the page has been altered to (hopefully) remove all 'campaigning' content and just report accurate
484:
And also while it's off, I would again ask each deletion requestor to postulate a criterion process that allows an avenue for a mayoralty candidate in a major city to post information about him/her self in Knowledge without first waiting for press coverage; which suggestion I realize contains a
472:
As an potential candidate for Mayor in the world's 48th largest city, and the fifth largest in North America, (and running for the second time in an identifiable category as a pragmatist reform candidate) I am not a notable. I will not fit the criteria that protectors of Knowledge posit as the
464:
I'm not a notable by this criterion. I have entered municipal politics on two separate previous occasions, always as a reformer; but after speech-making tours, fund-raisers, campaign literature, and stumping, each of my previous candidacies were low-profile --media-wise-- and not successful,
329:
or contributions by me dating back a number of years, 4 articles about me, and two pointers to some ecademy contribution I had made. I am aware of at least three other publications that have my contributions in them, that had I spent a great deal of time searching, I might have found.
473:
landmarks for entry so long as they rest upon my gaining a greater percentage of a vote taken four years ago , or a more frequent appearance in the popular press, or especially being chosen as a leading candidate by media during an election in their usual attempt to hijack the race.
485:
dangerous component of posting someone like myself who is non-notable in the Knowledge site. Perhaps a separate section under political candidates for their specific elections could be established, timed to self-erase after the election has concluded, or some such.
546:"Perhaps a separate section under political candidates for their specific elections could be established, timed to self-erase after the election has concluded, or some such." ... By all means, please do set up your own Wiki with this option. However,
158:
456:
I had asked the objectors to postulate some sort of assistance in formulating a forum in which to deal with matters of this kind, but was only met with inflexibility and unimaginative repetition of the current ruling.
343:
the Mayor's job is not intended to be campaigning . Your ideas re modifying the article so as to better fit your concept of what should be there are invited in this discussion. However, deletion is not on the table.
386:
has been made even stronger. Despite your claims that you're "not campaigning", you are in fact doing just that. It is obvious that neither you nor your proxy have taken the time to read the relevant guidelines on
152:
254:. For all its length, I just don't see a claim of notability that's even close to what our guidelines require, as the article is admittedly about a fringe candidate with no real coverage.
193:
with trivial coverage in sources, even if he is running for mayor now. He got "a total of 194 votes compared to the incumbent's 300,000" in the 2006 election; Google News brings up an
465:
rendering me a non-notable. This included a published video of a speech I made on YouTube outlining my candidacy-in-brief during an all-candidates' forum in the 2006 contest.
335:
Within Knowledge, I have been mentioned both as a former political contender for Board Of Education Trustee and Mayor...the latter received an entire paragraph of information.
119:
92:
87:
96:
79:
233:
The article itself attests to the subject's irrelevance. This smacks more of someone attempting to abuse Knowledge in order to further their political campaign.
481:
rewrite it so as to make it read a little less like campaign literature while containing the same information under the same common Knowledge heading format.
443:
Two arguments stemming from discussion with those opposition members who have taken the trouble to explain their positions strike me as fair and reasonable.
554:
that its Editors try to abide by. (Un)fortunately, this wiki does not have a category for "possible candidates in future elections". That all falls under the
551:
173:
194:
140:
403:. An event such as a political campaign may generate a good amount of press at the time, but in the long run it does not amount to very much.
202:
399:
candidate, let alone a major candidate. (0.05% of the winner's total) People will claim the red herring of "coverage", but they forget that
319:
This page, Mark State (Toronto Politician) was created on my behalf, so I believe that I may weigh in as a commentator in this discussion.
585:
Article), it would be more likely to remain. But as your current political situation hardly compares, neither can the Article about you.
521:
Thanks for any constructive advice you are willing to offer from experience and expertise. It will all be taken into consideration.
134:
305:
286:
52:- it is not its role to provide a platform for election candidates or to make up for any deficiencies of the press in that respect.
591:
539:
507:
434:
412:
377:
361:
290:
263:
242:
224:
61:
309:
130:
563:
17:
322:
First, thank you all for caring that Knowledge retain its encyclopedic nature, and being watchful that this remains the case.
180:
83:
373:
259:
75:
67:
606:
536:
504:
358:
146:
36:
605:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
574:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
369:
255:
446:
First, the piece does, upon reading it, seem in need of editing to remove its strong candidacy flavour.
301:
282:
297:
278:
567:
532:
528:
500:
496:
392:
354:
350:
274:
251:
395:. A candidate that receives less than a tenth of a percentage point of the total vote is not even a
408:
238:
166:
212:
559:
400:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
57:
325:
I believe I can reply to most of the comments in a way that will satisfy their authors.
404:
234:
562:. Please prior to making an Article about yourself, read what this Wiki does have in
218:
207:
49:
578:
113:
388:
190:
53:
582:
424:- violations of policy & guidelines need counting on fingers
599:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
332:
So, rest assured, Googling me can produce satisfactory results.
250:
A fringe candidate with no notability who clearly does not meet
368:"Deletion is not on the table?" That's what you think.
109:
105:
101:
165:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
609:). No further edits should be made to this page.
570:on that level in your Article (along with the
179:
8:
514:situational and referenced information.
201:, and Google itself appears to only have
346:I thank you all for your contributions.
7:
518:and acceptable a form as possible.
24:
564:Category:Politicians in Ontario
76:Mark State (Toronto politician)
68:Mark State (Toronto politician)
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
401:Knowledge is not a news source
1:
540:00:44, 02 December 2009 (UTC)
508:00:44, 01 December 2009 (UTC)
489:relevant information source.
435:06:07, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
413:14:48, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
378:05:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
362:00:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
291:23:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
264:15:39, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
243:14:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
225:07:31, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
592:23:57, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
62:18:37, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
626:
550:Wiki already has a set of
382:If anything, the case for
203:primary or trivial sources
537:User talk:MarkTheHandyman
505:User talk:MarkTheHandyman
602:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
552:guidelines and policies
310:few or no other edits
312:outside this topic.
527:Mark Mañuel State
495:Mark Mañuel State
440:--From Mark State:
566:. If you can show
48:. Knowledge is an
44:The result was
590:
531:comment added by
499:comment added by
433:
370:Shawn in Montreal
353:comment added by
313:
294:
277:comment added by
256:Shawn in Montreal
617:
604:
589:
588:
432:
431:
295:
293:
271:
223:
221:
215:
210:
184:
183:
169:
117:
99:
34:
625:
624:
620:
619:
618:
616:
615:
614:
613:
607:deletion review
600:
586:
533:User:Mark State
529:MarkTheHandyman
501:User:Mark State
497:MarkTheHandyman
429:
355:User:Mark State
351:MarkTheHandyman
272:
220:majestic titan)
219:
213:
208:
206:
126:
90:
74:
71:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
623:
621:
612:
611:
595:
594:
581:sources for a
524:All the best,
492:All the best,
438:
437:
418:
417:
416:
415:
349:Mark M. State
267:
266:
245:
189:Appears to be
187:
186:
123:
70:
65:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
622:
610:
608:
603:
597:
596:
593:
584:
580:
576:
573:
569:
568:WP:Notability
565:
561:
557:
553:
549:
545:
544:
543:
541:
538:
534:
530:
525:
522:
519:
515:
511:
509:
506:
502:
498:
493:
490:
486:
482:
478:
474:
470:
466:
462:
458:
454:
451:
447:
444:
441:
436:
427:
423:
420:
419:
414:
410:
406:
402:
398:
394:
390:
385:
381:
380:
379:
375:
371:
367:
366:
365:
363:
360:
356:
352:
347:
344:
340:
336:
333:
330:
326:
323:
320:
317:
314:
311:
307:
303:
299:
292:
288:
284:
280:
276:
265:
261:
257:
253:
252:WP:POLITICIAN
249:
246:
244:
240:
236:
232:
231:Speedy Delete
229:
228:
227:
226:
222:
216:
211:
204:
200:
198:
197:Detroit Times
192:
182:
178:
175:
172:
168:
164:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
139:
136:
132:
129:
128:Find sources:
124:
121:
115:
111:
107:
103:
98:
94:
89:
85:
81:
77:
73:
72:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
601:
598:
583:Biographical
571:
555:
547:
526:
523:
520:
516:
512:
494:
491:
487:
483:
479:
475:
471:
467:
463:
459:
455:
452:
448:
445:
442:
439:
425:
421:
396:
383:
348:
345:
341:
337:
334:
331:
327:
324:
321:
318:
315:
268:
247:
230:
196:
188:
176:
170:
162:
155:
149:
143:
137:
127:
50:encyclopedia
45:
43:
31:
28:
558:located at
542:</small
510:</small
393:politicians
364:</small
316:Gentlemen:
308:) has made
298:Hezbollatte
279:Hezbollatte
273:—Preceding
195:irrelevant
191:non-notable
153:free images
575:References
560:WP:Crystal
389:notability
587:Exit2DOS
430:Exit2DOS
405:DarkAudit
235:DarkAudit
579:Reliable
572:required
397:marginal
384:deletion
306:contribs
287:contribs
275:unsigned
120:View log
199:article
159:WP refs
147:scholar
93:protect
88:history
556:policy
428:toes.
422:Delete
248:Delete
131:Google
97:delete
54:JohnCD
46:delete
577:from
214:(talk
174:JSTOR
135:books
114:views
106:watch
102:links
16:<
548:This
409:talk
391:and
374:talk
359:talk
302:talk
283:talk
260:talk
239:talk
167:FENS
141:news
110:logs
84:talk
80:edit
58:talk
426:and
181:TWL
118:– (
411:)
376:)
304:•
296:—
289:)
285:•
262:)
241:)
217:•
209:Ed
161:)
112:|
108:|
104:|
100:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
60:)
535:(
503:(
407:(
372:(
357:(
300:(
281:(
258:(
237:(
205:—
185:)
177:·
171:·
163:·
156:·
150:·
144:·
138:·
133:(
125:(
122:)
116:)
78:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.