Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Brown (Texas politician)

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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:36, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Brown (Texas politician)

[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)

Doesn't meet the thresholds of WP:NPOL or WP:POLOUTCOMES. Nor is there anything to meet WP:GNG. Contested PROD. Cabayi (talk) 12:06, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 12:06, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 12:06, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:48, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Lufkin TX is not large enough to hand its mayors an automatic free pass over WP:NPOL just because they exist — but the article doesn't even try to claim a reason why he might be more notable than the norm for smalltown mayors, and is not referenced anywhere close to well enough to get him over WP:GNG. The notability test for smalltown mayors is not just "as soon as one news story in their local media verifies their election", because every single mayor of anywhere can always show that — the notability test for smalltown mayors is the ability to write a substantive and well-sourced article about their significance as a mayor, which is not what this article is. Bearcat (talk) 17:58, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:POLOUTCOMES, WP:POLOUTCOMES states "Mayors of cities of at least regional prominence have usually survived AFD", and "smaller towns, however, are generally deemed not notable just for being mayors", a "small town" is considered to be a town with less than 20,000 residents. Lufkin is categorized as a "large town", it has 35,000 residents or over 20,000 residents. Plus Lufkin is the largest town in Deep East Texas, and is in the top 10 largest towns in the East Texas region which could is "regional prominence."Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 21:05, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article has very little other than stating that he is the mayor of this moderate-size town, and a few personal details. According to WP:POLOUTCOMES, municipal mayors are only notable if they have some specific notability other than holding office. Bob Brown has no such notability. Red Panda 25 22:10, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, RedPanda25, WP:POLOUTCOMES doesn't state that mayors need to have notability outside of office for larger towns. It only states that for mayors of small towns.Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 22:27, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The phrasing of "smaller towns" in WP:POLOUTCOMES is not the same as the definition of "small towns" you are thinking of. Generally speaking, WP:NPOL doesn't apply to mayors of municipalities unless its at least a moderately-sized one (100,000+). Best, GPL93 (talk) 22:33, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What WP:POLOUTCOMES meant by "smaller towns" is the actual definition of smaller town. What you think it means is irrelevant unless you have evidence to support your claim of (100,000+). You're also not taking in account the "regional prominence" of Lufkin.Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 23:03, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, GPL93 is correct about what POLOUTCOMES meant by "smaller towns". The rule is most definitely not that as soon as a place reaches 20,000 in population, its mayors suddenly get an automatic guaranteed right to have Wikipedia articles regardless of the quality of sourcing or substance those articles actually contain: the notability criterion for local politicians is "who have received significant press coverage", which is not what this article is showing. You need to be familiar with the actual outcomes of past AFDs on similar topics if you expect to be taken seriously as an authority on Wikipedia's notability criteria — and past AFDs have very clearly not supported a population of 20,000 as an instant notability-maker for a mayor. Bearcat (talk) 23:16, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Conversely, you have no evidence that I'm wrong either. It doesn't state that a "smaller town" is a town of less than 20,000 in WP:POLOUTCOMES. I am basing the population number on what I have seen in previous AfD's. GPL93 (talk) 23:10, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:POLOUTCOMES does not specifically state below 20,000 as a "small town" but Settlement hierarchy does state that as the definition of a smaller town as a town below 20,000, I do have a source for what WP:POLOUTCOMES could have meant by small town. There has been no source given stating a town at least 100,000 as no longer a small town. We are also not taking in the account that Lufkin is the largest town in the Deep East Texas region which is "regional prominence." WP:POLOUTCOMES doesn't state that population significance is based off the result of other AFD's.Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 23:33, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm telling you, you don't need to show a "source" for your interpretation of what "small towns" means in POLOUTCOMES — Wikipedians who've been around here for over a decade, and know much better than you about what was intended by it, are telling you what it is. And at any rate, POLOUTCOMES is simply a summary of common outcomes, not the trump card in a notability debate — the trump card for notability of mayors is WP:NPOL #2, where the notability test is "who have received significant press coverage", but that's not what you're showing. NPOL trumps POLOUTCOMES, not vice versa. Bearcat (talk) 01:26, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also please note that settlement hierarchy is a concept that is used for Land-use planning in the United Kingdom, doesn't particularly apply here for a US municipality. It's also a theoretical concept that has some drawbacks. Also note that Deep East Texas is a sub-region and that, additionally, simply being the largest or one of the largest towns in an area doesn't mean that it automatically meets "regional prominence". GPL93 (talk) 04:08, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I have seen us delete articles on mayors of places with over 100,000 people. Clearly when we are under 50,000 the place is not large enough to give a mayor default notability. This is a clear case here.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:58, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NPOL.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:30, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG. My very best wishes (talk) 02:31, 13 March 2019 (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.