Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barb Kelly

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:15, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barb Kelly

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Biography of a mayor, not demonstrated as the subject of sufficient reliable source coverage to pass WP:NPOL #2. As always, mayors are not automatically notable enough for Wikipedia articles just for existing as mayors, and the notability test hinges on the ability to write a substantive article, referenced to a significant volume of reliable source coverage, about her political career: specific things she did, specific projects she spearheaded, specific effects her leadership had on the development of the community, and on and so forth. But this barely goes any further than "there once was a mayor who lived and died, the end", and is referenced entirely to three short blurbs that aren't enough to pass WP:GNG all by themselves, with no evidence of genuinely substantive coverage shown at all.
The mere fact that she existed is not "inherently" notable enough to exempt the article from having to have a lot more substance, and a lot more sourcing to support it, than this. Bearcat (talk) 21:43, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 21:43, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The subject was mayor of a municipality of almost 80,000 folks. Bearian (talk) 01:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which has nothing to do with our notability criteria for mayors. Those hinge on the quality and depth of what can be said about her mayoralty based on reliable sources, and confer absolutely no exemptions from that just because of the population of the municipality. Bearcat (talk) 16:07, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lacks independent, reliable sources that demonstrate her notability --Jiaoriballisse (talk) 11:35, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Coverage is WP:ROUTINE or WP:TRIVIALMENTION; no evidence of passing WP:GNG. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:21, 30 October 2024 (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.