Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darrell Mussatto

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 no consensus. Looks like this article is solidly in the grey area.Mojo Hand (talk) 16:13, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Darrell Mussatto[edit]

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

WP:BLP, relying entirely on primary sources with not a shred of reliable source coverage in sight, of a mayor. The city is large enough that he might qualify for a properly written and properly sourced article, but at 48K it is not large enough to confer an automatic presumption of notability on a mayor — and furthermore, this article as written is edging heavily into résumé style (bullet-point list of committee positions), which is never acceptable in any article regardless of whether it passes our notability rules or not. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 01:59, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 01:59, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 01:59, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:22, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No independent coverage and simply being the mayor of a town of 48K is not enough to grant automatic notability.131.118.229.17 (talk) 21:44, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What a strange IP. It seems to log on just to vote in scores of AFDs. I have no idea what to make of it.ShulMaven (talk) 23:23, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(shrugs) That it's an anon IP who does Wikignome work at AfD, and you gotta admit that 50 more AfD regulars'd be none too many. As long as the IP isn't trolling and makes policy-based arguments instead of "It's useful" or "Does no harm" crap, where's the fuss? Nha Trang ^Allons! 19:59, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:27, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep So, I keep running into this string of AFDs on small-city mayors. ( I tend to skim over the AFDs on musicians and new software) And I think, right, can't be notable. I almost wrote delete after reading argument made by Nom and glancing at the page. But then I thought, no, I really ought to at least run a quick google. so I did, and again realized not only how much coverage small city mayors actually get, but how significant it is to be elected to run a city of 50,000 or so people. There's actually quite a lot of coverage of Mussatto, and it goes far beyond passing references. I mean, there are real issues in a city this size; his opinions and the impact his decisions have get real coverage. May take a swing sourcing this article later. But even a short review of the stuff that comes to the top of any search shows that the material to build a good article is out there.ShulMaven (talk) 23:20, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did a little sourcing. Turns out the city pop. is growing rapidly (now over 50,000) as an old shipbuilding district becomes a hot area for condo development (Vancouver growing north, I presume) with Mussatto backing the developers and a fair amount of ensuing political contention. Latest election hotly contested. Didn't have time to listen to CBC interview with him on development (added it to article - media section) , or to read the many articles in the Vancouver Sun and more local papers on the fight over development, but there is notability and news coverage. Hot issues political battles are fought by mayors in towns you and I never heard of.ShulMaven (talk) 23:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's also a quality-of-the-article issue here — even a politician who cleanly passes WP:NPOL still isn't ever under any circumstances whatsoever entitled to keep an article that's written and formatted as a résumé (and no article is ever allowed to contain a "media" section that contains direct offsite links, either; his own primary website may be listed in the "external links" section and the infobox, and any other EL to any other site at all may be present only as a footnoted reference for body text content.) And it's a long-established principle of Wikipedia that interviews with the subject do not confer notability for our purposes — you need sources in which he's the subject to get him over our inclusion rules, not sources in which he's the speaker. For added bonus, the sourcing here is still almost entirely of the primary variety. Bearcat (talk) 08:02, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 00:53, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I guess I missed the part where a population threshold was set down in black-and-white. WP:POLITICIAN doesn't have one. Anyone like to link to it? Nha Trang ^Allons! 21:28, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As WP:POLOUTCOMES explains, the established consensus for mayors is that they're only entitled to claim NPOL in cities of "regional prominence" — not everybody draws the "what constitutes regional prominence" line at the same place, with some accepting 50K and others insisting on 100K instead, but there's no consensus to automatically accept mayors of anything below 50K as "automatically notable just because they exist". I said right up front that the article could absolutely be kept if he could be sourced up enough to pass WP:GNG, but that still hasn't been demonstrated at all — and no mayor, not even the mayor of a city in the millions, ever gets to keep an entirely primary sourced résumé on here. Bearcat (talk) 08:16, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As I see it, this minor politician has just enough meaty coverage (CBC, Vancouver Sun) to squeak through. Bearcat disagrees. However, this old industrial town is booming, gentrifying, and people may want to know who he is because there are major development battles going on and Mussatto just got re-elected. I suggest closing to No consensus.ShulMaven (talk) 17:45, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:POLITICIAN. The only significant source in the article is an article from the Vancouver Sun, a regional paper, about the issues in the election. That's routine coverage, and everything else is either hyper-local coverage or self-referential links. --MelanieN (talk) 23:34, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The Vancouver Sun is one of the top newspapers of the province of British Columbia and is a reliable source which helps establish Mussato's WP:GNG. --Leoboudv (talk) 09:10, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The Vancouver Sun coverage is enough to pass GNG. Vrac (talk) 15:16, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Darrell Mussatto is a major local political figure with sufficient press coverage to consider him notable as per WP:POLITICIAN. The article needs improvement, not deletion. Iaritmioawp (talk) 22:03, 14 December 2014 (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.