Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Menashe Miller

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:33, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Menashe Miller[edit]

Menashe Miller (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of a person notable only as deputy mayor of a township. This is not a level of office that confers an automatic WP:NPOL pass, but the article is not referenced well enough to satisfy the "who have received significant press coverage" part of our inclusion criteria for local officeholders -- of the 18 footnotes here, nine of them are primary sources, such as his "our council" profile on the township government's own self-published website about itself and raw tables of election results, and seven of the other nine are blogs or YouTube videos. And of the two that actually qualify as reliable sources, one of them is here only to support a tangential assertion about the township's demographics, while completely failing to even mention Miller's name -- so it's not coverage of him at all. All of which means that nothing here earns him an article under either NPOL or GNG. Bearcat (talk) 03:59, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 04:00, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 04:00, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This looks and reads like a typical Wikipedia article, with neutral point of view and appropriate graphics. This does not seem to be a promotional piece, but a legitimate biography.Catherinejarvis (talk) 19:25, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To be kept on Wikipedia, an article also has to have a notability claim that passes a notability standard, and sources that pass our reliable sourcing standards — neither of which are present here at all. We don't keep articles just because of what they look like, or because they have pretty pictures on them — as important a condition as article quality is, it's not a sufficient condition by itself if there's no actual notability to speak of. Bearcat (talk) 00:11, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination and per NPOL. only (talk) 02:30, 23 July 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.