Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timothy Harleth

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 and redirect to White House Chief Usher#List of Chief Ushers. Sandstein 12:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Timothy Harleth (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Bringing it to you all to discuss. Now... this article is only two sentences, including one with citation overkill. In my view, this person is evidently a non-notable member of this administration. I mean, if Angella Reid wasn’t even mentioned here this article would have 0 legs to stand on. I’m not disputing that sources given aren’t reliable (except maybe Washington Times) but the only mentions of this guy in articles is about how he used to work for the Trump Hotels. No notability of himself. I recommend redirecting his name to the the Chief Usher page if it’s not chosen for deletion. Trillfendi (talk) 00:02, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 00:22, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 00:22, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 00:22, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The subject is non-notable, although I feel the same way about his predecessor. The gratuitous and unjustified attack on the Washington Times in the nomination is not worth having.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:57, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn’t an attack, it’s just that their editorial standards aren’t on par with their peers including the ones referenced in this article. It’s comparable to Daily Mail.Trillfendi (talk) 01:06, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete All of the coverage is on him being hired, it's not really about him, more a "the White House has a chief usher" public interest story. Now, all White House ushers have articles - I'm not sure how notable they actually are, though the historical ones seem better referenced compared to the problematic Gary J. Walters article. SportingFlyer talk 09:00, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete, unless the article can be expanded two sentences relating to his appointment as White House Chief Usher, and his previous service at the Trump International Hotel, otherwise I would not consider him to be as notable as his two immediate predecessors, Angella Reid, the article I previously created on the first woman Chief Usher, and Stephen W. Rochon who served as the first African-American Chief Usher.--TommyBoy (talk) 08:03, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete there is a lot of RS coverage on his hiring, but it goes into little depth. If someone had written an in-depth profile, we might have a case for keep. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 07:55, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per BLP1E. EnPassant (talk) 18:25, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to White House Chief Usher. I can imagine that this search term isn't too uncommon for numerous political reasons I'd rather not get into. Anyone searching for the term would, at the very least, want a redirect to the article about his position in the Trump admin. Along with the WP:ATD and WP:CHEAP guidelines arguing for the redirect, I think the best solution is to do just that. Redditaddict69 ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:43, 17 November 2018 (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.