Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don L. Crawford

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:56, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don L. Crawford

[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)

Biography of a person notable only as a city councillor, not adequately referenced for the purposes of getting him over WP:NPOL #2. Dayton OH is not a global city for the purposes of getting the "city councillors are inherently notable" pass, so the inclusion test he would have to pass is that he could be referenced and substanced well enough to mark him out as special -- but the article literally just states that he existed as a city councillor, the end, and the four footnotes aren't doing a strong job of actually getting him over WP:GNG.
The New York Times source is a glancing namecheck of his existence in an article that's primarily about somebody else; the Jet source is a 54-word blurb that isn't substantive enough to get him over GNG all by itself; and the Dayton Daily News is the local newspaper where some coverage of Dayton's city councillors would simply be expected to exist. Feature Writing for Newspapers, meanwhile, links to a generic directory profile for the book rather than a readable PDF copy of the book, so I'm unable to verify whether there's any genuinely substantive content about him in it or not — but it appears to be a journalism textbook, so if there is content about him in it then it's likely to be an existing news article from another source being annotated as an example of journalistic structure, rather than core content actually written by the book's author that would have any direct bearing on Crawford's notability in its own right.
All of which means that this isn't enough sourcing to get him over the bar -- GNG does not just count up the number of sources that mention a person's name and keep everything that meets or exceeds two, but also applies depth and range and context tests that these sources aren't passing. Bearcat (talk) 17:59, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:00, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:00, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hm, this one's a little less cut-and-dried. He was the first black city commissioner. He's got a park named after him. This one might be borderline notable. valereee (talk) 18:58, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, and he's also in the "Notable Kentucky African Americans" database at UK. Groan. Dayton City Commissioners are not really one of my research or writing interests lol. Why don't we have a persons-of-color deletion sorting list? valereee (talk) 19:16, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That certainly may help if he can be shown to have received a lot more media coverage for it than just the weaksauce stuff present here, but being the first member of an underrepresented group to hold a city council seat in his own city (but not simultaneously the first person ever to do it in the entire country) is not in and of itself an instant notability freebie that would exempt him from still having to have better sources than this. Bearcat (talk) 20:09, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per profile in Jet Magazine (https://books.google.com/books?id=mbkDAAAAMBAJ, November 18, 1965). The article is entitled "Hot Mayoral Races in Two Other Ohio Cities," and includes about two full pages of text about the 1965 election. There is also a blurb about Crawford in Jet when he resigned from the Commission to be the Commission clerk. --Enos733 (talk) 06:04, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:08, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 00:03, 20 February 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.