Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane Fitzsimmons

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Mediran (t • c) 01:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shane Fitzsimmons

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

Tagged for notability for 5 years; couldn't establish notability. Boleyn (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment With the current fires across Australia, the subject has been quoted a lot in the press in recent days, so basic verification has been possible (now added refs). That leaves the question of whether his role (state level official) is sufficient for notability? AllyD (talk) 13:03, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 19:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 19:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 19:22, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The subject satisfies WP:BASIC. He has been featured in the media over an extended period: 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2003 and also reported in other nations including New Zealand, India, USA, Philippines etc. WWGB (talk) 02:28, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the subject has been covered extensively in news media in relation to bush fire seasons over many years (if nothing else, at least since his appointment as Commissioner in 2007). Even without the routine coverage he would receive as spokesperson for the rural fire service (5,500+ GoogleNews hits for "Shane Fitzsimmons"), there are much broader personal profiles in major newspapers like this one that I would think allow the subject to pass WP:GNG. Stalwart111 04:24, 15 January 2013 (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.