Talk:Wayne Dropulich

Redirect to Sports Party?

Would anyone oppose redirecting this to the party's article? I think the content of this article is adequately covered (if not duplicated) at Australian Sports Party. Unsuccessful candidates generally aren't notable in themselves, though I guess you could argue being a senator-elect is notable, even if the person doesn't quite make it to parliament. I'd still go for a redirect. IgnorantArmies 06:29, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't know which article talkpage it was now (i'm sure someone else will read this and know) but consensus was that Wayne Dropulich was elected Senator so he qualifies for his own article. I was of the opinion he shouldn't have his own article but i've since been convinced otherwise - marginally. Timeshift (talk) 06:33, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I would absolutely (and strongly) oppose redirecting this article, as did the people who responded the last time this was raised (I believe on the AusPol WikiProject page, from memory). He's not just an "unsuccessful candidate" - he was a successful candidate in an election that was overturned in the courts, and has the biographical coverage in reliable sources that come with that. We cannot possibly have high-quality coverage of the invalidation and subsequent revote in WA if we delete articles on the people initially elected. The Drover's Wife (talk) 18:46, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Also strongly oppose a redirect. He was clearly elected, even if he never took his seat and the election was voided. That means he meets WP:POLITICIAN. Frickeg (talk) 06:49, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I'd strongly support redirecting this article. I think those opposed have interpreted WP:POLITICIAN (a guideline) too strictly. It should be noted that that guideline describes common outcomes, and the section is described thus: "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included." Dropulich is a low-profile individual who had a passive role in a minor event relating to Australian federal election, 2013. As per WP:BLP1E, there should not be an article about him. I'd suggest Australian federal election, 2013 as an appropriate place to have the information in this article. Cjhard (talk) 04:55, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

I continue to oppose this. In this case, the situation is unusual enough to warrant an article, and there's plenty of information to draw on - even without WP:POLITICIAN, there's enough for GNG. Frickeg (talk) 06:57, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

I don't disagree that the situation is unusual enough to warrant an article. But this isn't an article about the situation, it's an article about a man named Wayne Dropulich, who hasn't been given any coverage in reliable sources since 2014, and that was about the situation. That most of the content of the article is about the situation, rather than Wayne Dropulich or his specific role in the situation, makes this article a WP:COATRACK. Cjhard (talk) 07:09, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Dropulich was elected to the Senate in a unique situation in Australian history. The claim that winning an election is a case of WP:BLP1E is manifestly absurd, as is the notion that "the guy wins an election" is a different subject from "the guy". The Sports Party is a historical blip that has an article because we keep articles of all microparties (for reasons like Dropulich's election), but Dropulich is the only person in Australian history to win and election and then be unseated because an AEC screwup forced a revote and obviously personally notable for that reason. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:50, 13 November 2017 (UTC)