Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amy Koopmanschap

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. SmartSE (talk) 19:57, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Amy Koopmanschap

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

Inadequately sourced biography of a seemingly non-notable politician. Fails WP:POLITICIAN. - Mr X 21:17, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. - Mr X 21:18, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. - Mr X 21:18, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

She's a mayor - doesn't pass wp:POLITICIAN (I think). Dutch Wikipedia doesn't help much - she has a page but her only reference appears to be the Green Party. Google doesn't help much. Delete Neonchameleon (talk) 23:41, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment She comes close to WP:POLITICIAN, but probably not quite there. Mayors can pass WP:POLITICIAN but that usually requires both that their position is executive rather than ceremonial and that the area concerned is important enough - she passes on the first but a suburb of Amsterdam with a population of 25,000 doesn't pass the second (unless her 15 years in this and equivalent positions counts). What probably gets her rather closer is being a senior member of the Congress of the Council of Europe - an international body with some indirect legislative powers but probably insufficient to count as a legislature. On WP:GNG, she gets enough Google hits about both her local and international activities that she may very well pass - unfortunately, with Google News archive searches not available, I have no method of filtering through to hits likely to be reliable enough to be worth looking at. Does anyone else? PWilkinson (talk) 11:16, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 17:25, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, mayor is a notable post. --Soman (talk) 02:32, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per Soman. A mayor in indeed notable. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 05:22, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete She's the mayor of a pretty small place, and membership on a council isn't enough to establish notability. Mangoe (talk) 12:38, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, she is not just member of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, but vice president, a position that implies notability, see http://en.aravot.am/2013/06/19/154953/ . See also http://www.oslobodjenje.ba/daily-news/week-in-review/european-commission-report-disappointing-results-for-bih , http://www.top-channel.tv/english/artikull.php?id=3239 --Soman (talk) 17:02, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment ~~Does anyone have a source that confirms she's a mayor? The article doesn't even mention it. Mkdw ^talk 05:00, 1 February 2014 (UTC)~~ The place where she is mayor is very small and does not seem to meet WP:POLITICIAN. As for her work in the Congress of the Council of Europe, I am uncertain the depth of influence that body has. She does not appear to meet WP:SIGCOV. Hard to weight inherent notability on her position against WP:POLITICIAN on this one. Mkdw ^talk 06:06, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What's she the mayor of? Mayors are definitely not inherently notable. --BDD (talk) 20:09, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Diemen, a suburb of Amsterdam, according to the Dutch Wikipedia article (and other sources). PWilkinson (talk) 20:05, 5 February 2014 (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.