Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darryn Causby

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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. So Why 07:17, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Darryn Causby

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

Minimally sourced WP:BLP of a person notable as lord mayor of a local district, in a place where the position ceremonially rotates every year rather than being a directly elected executive position. This is not an automatic inclusion freebie under WP:NPOL -- it wouldn't matter if the article were sourced well enough to clear the "who have received significant press coverage" part of our criteria for local officeholders, but ceremonial-rotation mayors are not entitled to an automatic presumption of notability on sourcing as limited as what's shown here: all that's here is one article about the end of his term, and one Proust-style questionnaire about such probing matters as his favourite film, his favourite book and his favourite way to relax. This is simply not substantive enough coverage to claim that he's passed NPOL #2. Bearcat (talk) 14:51, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Northern Ireland-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:12, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:12, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete BLP of a ceremonial mayor that does not come close to passing WP:NPOL. AusLondonder (talk) 18:46, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 00:44, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —MRD 20 14 02:43, 27 June 2017 (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.