Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nora Radest

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 redirect to List of mayors of Summit, New Jersey with prejudice against recreation. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:03, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nora Radest (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

This is an article for the mayor of a small city in New Jersey. The sources provided are utterly trivial, covering 1) her role as mayor, 2) her unopposed election and 3) a state of the city speech. There is no in-depth coverage in the article and I was unable to find in a Google search any of the in-depth material about her in reliable and verifiable sources that would be needed to meet the notability standard. Alansohn (talk) 18:05, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and New Jersey. Alansohn (talk) 18:05, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:NPOL. All of the sources are entirely local and do not demonstrate the subject has notability outside of her small city.4meter4 (talk) 18:17, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  This page has already been reviewed and deemed Notable due to the fact she is the current mayor of the city. I'll look for some other sources regardless. Scu ba (talk) 21:03, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  There is no policy which says that one is granted notability simply by being a "current" mayor. -Indy beetle (talk) 22:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Regardless the article was approved for notability when it had 3 sources, now it has 12. I believe these sources warrants notable mention in the media. Scu ba (talk) 13:24, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Wikipedia has no process for "approving" the notability of any article that wasn't created via the WP:AFC process. It exists because you created it, not because anybody "approved" it. Bearcat (talk) 12:56, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  As stated above, there is no "approval" process that supersedes the requirement to demonstrate notability through in-depth coverage in independent reliable and verifiable sources. None of the 12 references meet that standard. Alansohn (talk) 20:02, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect/ (partial merge) to List of mayors of Summit, New Jersey. Djflem (talk) 07:21, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and/or redirect. The footnoting here is not sufficient to establish the notability of a small-town mayor: half of the footnotes are primary sources, such as her "staff" profile on the city government's website and other content self-published by organizations that she's directly affiliated with, which are not support for notability at all. Then half of the other half come from Patch, a site which exists entirely to provide local-interest stories about local-interest topics that aren't significant enough for real media to bother with, so it doesn't represent WP:GNG-building coverage or analysis either. And then once we've discounted those too, what's left on the table after that still isn't cutting it, as it comprises two articles about other people that happen to glancingly namecheck Nora Radest's existence and a radio interview in which Nora Radest is the speaker rather than the subject being spoken about, which doesn't help to build notability. GNG isn't just "count the footnotes and keep anything that surpasses an arbitrary number" — it evaluates the footnotes for their type, quality, depth and geographic range, not just their raw number, and there's just nothing here that represents what's required to establish the permanent notability of a smalltown mayor. (And no, "current" has nothing to do with it, either: incumbent mayors don't get any bonus points over and above former mayors just because of incumbency status per se.) Bearcat (talk) 12:56, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. and Bearcat. Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Sal2100 (talk) 20:19, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: per nom. Contributor008 (talk) 17:29, 29 October 2022 (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.