Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kelly McDowell

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 keep. Policy-based arguments lead to "keep" - Bearian and Oakshade the strongest the panda ₯’ 22:37, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly McDowell[edit]

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

This is a page that asserts the person was mayor of a city, but no where explains anything they did as such that would make them notable. Much of the article is written in first person, and it relies heavily on very local sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:17, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep-Being a mayor is notable enough. Though I do think more expert knowledge is needed. (Interesting-nothing about where they were political or anything like that though) Wgolf (talk) 17:51, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom - Being a mayor doesn't necessarily make you notable. -→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 20:41, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Being the mayor of a small city (16K) without any special achievements isn't enough. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:43, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep articles such as this one discuss his term in office and the notable work he did. I think it's enough, but I suppose it could be considered "regional". Candleabracadabra (talk) 21:33, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Being a mayor of a major city may make you notable. Being the mayor of a city of 16,000 people certainly does not. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:52, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - being mayor of a smallish city is not enough, but he probably passes my standards as a notable lawyer. He's been a city politician for over a decade, he was on regional commissions, he's been chair of the Independent Cities Association (which I understand is a big deal in California), and he's been chair of a large sanitation district. Considering all the possible news sources online, I'd say he also passes GNG. Bearian (talk) 21:39, 30 April 2014 (UTC) PS - he fought the airport authority and won a million-plus-dollar settlement; that might count as a major accomplishment. Bearian (talk) 21:41, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for linking to your notability criteria for attorneys. I have trouble identifying which criteria you believe this subject meets. PS the sources only say he was "involved" in the talks that resulted in a deal with the airport authority. --MelanieN (talk) 18:49, 3 May 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, Mz7 (talk) 14:57, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This guy is a perfect illustration of why we DON'T presume mayors to be notable - certainly not mayors of smallish cities. He has received almost no independent coverage, and there is nothing to suggest that the coverage is out there if we could just find it. According to WP:POLITICIAN, "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article". This person has not received significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Claims here that "mayors are notable" are based on WP:Common outcomes#politicians; however, it states the opposite: "Municipal politicians are not inherently notable just for being in politics, but neither are they inherently non-notable just because they are in local politics. Each case is evaluated on its own individual merits. Mayors of cities of at least regional prominence have usually survived AFD, although the article should say more than just "Jane Doe is the mayor of Cityville". Mayors of smaller towns, however, are generally deemed not notable just for being mayors, although they may be notable for other reasons in addition to their mayoralty." In this case, the coverage is lacking for GNG, and we can't assume that it is there. I certainly hope we haven't reached the point where we consider "chair of a sanitation district" to provide notability, and speaking as a Californian I can assure you that the Association of Independent Cities is no big deal. --MelanieN (talk) 18:42, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To the contrary, and as Bearian noted, there are sources discussing his involvement in major issues covered very substantially in independent sources. They are regional issues but they were certainly covered and the sources are independent. He seems to have led the push for noise abatement at LAX among other issues. Candleabracadabra (talk) 18:58, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do you base that on? The sources merely say that he was involved in the talks. --MelanieN (talk) 19:38, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete. Local boy goes to law school becomes mayor of tiny town. Nice, but zero notability. Fails WP:GNG. No significant coverage. Only real coverage is in "Daily Breeze," a free, community newspaper. Two articles are written by the same reporter and say exactly the same thing in two different publications. Malke 2010 (talk) 20:52, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Speedy delete" is out of the question at this point as that action, barring BLP or banned user issues, is only reserved for all !votes at a certain point are for "delete" with no chance for the article being kept. Do you have any deletion argument that relates to our notability guidelines? A city of a population of about 17,000 is not a"tiny town."--Oakshade (talk) 22:03, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is - in context. There are 88 incorporated cities in Los Angeles County. The top 15 are all over 100,000. I couldn't find out exactly where El Segundo ranks in Los Angeles County, but it's not in the top 50. In the context of the region this is a very small town. --MelanieN (talk) 01:10, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think anyone would consider the city of El Segundo a "tiny town." Sure in the context of the Los Angeles Metropolitan area it's a relatively small city as compared to other ones, but when most people think "tiny town," they think of something like Ashfield, Massachusetts or Spillville, Iowa, not the fully urbanized city, and an important one, of a major metropolitan area. A similar city in the New York area would be Englewood, New Jersey and that city wouldn't be considered a "tiny town" either. Smaller than many other New York area cities? Yes. "Tiny town"? No. --Oakshade (talk) 06:07, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - El Segundo, while relatively small, is a very important city to both the region and nation. It's the location of Los Angeles Air Force Base, the Space and Missile Systems Center, a major Northrop Grumman facility, a huge amount of support services for the adjacent Los Angeles International Airport and the headquarters of DirecTV. City regulation, tax laws, business incentives and location play a major role in the function and location of these major business and being the Mayor of this city is the center of such a government. This person also passes WP:NOTABILITY and its WP:GNG as there has been significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. [1][2] --Oakshade (talk) 22:01, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I still don't see how any of that makes Kelly McDowell notable. Given that argument, everybody in El Segundo government should have a Wiki article. I'd change my vote if you could show notability for this person other than having a law degree and being the mayor of a small SoCal city. Malke 2010 (talk) 17:14, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's just a straw man argument as nobody is claiming that "everybody in El Segundo government should have a Wiki article". The argument is that this person passes WP:NOTABILITY and its WP:GNG in addition to being the mayor of a significant important city. --Oakshade (talk) 18:07, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the mayor of a small city can be notable, in exceptional or unusual circumstances. However, McDowell doesn't appear to be that, just a regular city mayor doing what city mayors do. That's not a reflection on the quality of the job he did, just an acknowledgement there are hundreds or thousands of others across the world doing the exact same thing at any given time. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 08:58, 17 May 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Keep - Oakshade has demonstrated that McDowell satisfies GNG, and I found some more sources for some newsworthy actions as mayor (added to the article), so it is not necessary to consider POLITICIAN or the inherent notability of being a mayor. RockMagnetist (talk) 16:55, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment fails WP:GNG. No significant coverage. Malke 2010 (talk) 18:50, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Malke 2010, you already !voted above in which you said nothing about how this topic fails our guidelines as you didn't here. Merely citing a guideline/policy without rationale of why is simply WP:JUSTAPOLICY. And why did you edit my own !vote above ruining the formatting? [3] --Oakshade (talk) 19:54, 17 May 2014 (UTC):O[reply]

Oakshade, sorry didn't intentionally do that. My Mac has developed a very hyper trackpad for some reason which creates lots of weird mistakes. Malke 2010 (talk) 22:01, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How does your mousepad make you vote twice ? ... Please explain as that's rather confusing... →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 22:24, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where do you see two votes? I've made comments, but it looks like one ivote to me. Malke 2010 (talk) 22:28, 17 May 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.