Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Abrahams

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 Mayor of Mansfield. T. Canens (talk) 02:05, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Abrahams

[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)

BLP article about the mayor of a town in UK. I originally redirected this to Mayor of Mansfield, but this was objected to and I self reverted.

I do not believe the article meets GNG, BASIC or NPOL. The article has two sources (each listed twice), one is an election results page from the city, so it is not an IS and does not provide SIGCOV that address the subject directly or in-depth. The other source is a local news interview with the individual about his candidacy for mayor; other than the subjects interview question answers about local issues, it contains very limited information about the subject, nothing that would be considered SIGCOV addressing the subject directly or in-depth. BEFORE showed a sparse amount of the same type of coverage.

Since this is a BLP and a public figure, it's important that we strictly follow sourcing and notability requirements. Subject appears to be a good average normal person, who was elected to a local position.

I originally thought this was an appropriate AfD, but decided to be conservative and did a redirect instead, even though I think the article title is a common name and unlikely search term. I believe Delete is the best result, but if a redirect is a possible alternative. // Timothy :: talk 13:51, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 13:51, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 13:51, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Whilst the 2 sources don't give notability by themselves, there are plenty of sources available [1] that could be added to enable the article to meet WP:POLITICIAN (Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage}. The Mayor of Mansfield is a directly elected position, unlike most British mayors who are unelected and chosen by the local council ruling party, so is a more significant position than the majority of other British mayors. --John B123 (talk) 14:18, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mayor of Mansfield as TB did originally. All the coverage I'm seeing is in a small local paper in Mansfield, which (although WP:AUD does not apply to NPOL) seems inadequate to demonstrate notability. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:47, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mayor of Mansfield. Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. KidAd talk 20:44, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and/or redirect per nom. Mayors are not handed an automatic notability freebie just because they exist — the key to making a mayor notable enough for a Wikipedia article is not just to verify his technical victory in the election and a bit of biographical trivia about his family, but to write a substantive article about his political significance: specific city-building projects he spearheaded, specific and concrete effects he had on the development of the city, and on and so forth. So no, simply being able to source his existence to a primary source table of election results and a single article in a community hyperlocal about his initial selection as his party's candidate is not enough to make a notable mayor — local coverage isn't entirely verboten when it comes to helping to establish the notability of a mayor, but one hit isn't enough all by itself. Regardless of whether your sources for a mayor are localized or nationalized, there still have to be a lot more of them than this. Bearcat (talk) 23:35, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I objected to one editor making a unilateral decision to single-out one bio stub when there is a list of similar at Directly elected mayors in England and Wales#Mayoralties administering a single local authority area. I made this clear at Talk prior to this deletion review, and it was ignored. The establishing editor also made it clear in the initial edit summary: "Creation of page for third directly elected Mayor of Mansfield. As it is the only DE Mayor with no wiki page". Again, I clarified this latter aspect at Talk as inclusive of other areas, not simply relating to the previous two incumbents.
On the basis of delete/redirect, the following also need to be listed:
As the nom seems adept with the TW utility, I trust this will now eventuate to demonstrate Wiki-consistency?
Local politicians will - generally - attract only local press coverage, unless there's additional factors - notoriety, ferinstance. As I stated at Talk (and is covered elsewhere), Abrahams was a last-minute candidate, hence no prior coverage. It's pointless now bothering to expand the article or even format the refs.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 01:55, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Bearcat's NPOL argument, which he puts more eloquently than I ever could. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:54, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As indicated in the nomination, I believe a redirect is an acceptable resolution. // Timothy :: talk 23:15, 27 September 2020 (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.