Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rob Schroder

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 -- previously deleted by admin. (non-admin closure) Rollidan (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rob Schroder[edit]

[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)

Fails to meet WP:NPOL as a small-town mayor with no other offices held. Could not find significant coverage outside the local area. Sounder Bruce 00:56, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Sounder Bruce 00:56, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Sounder Bruce 00:56, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:01, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep The NPOL defines notable politicians and judges as "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage." Coming from the fact I was able to find 30 sources either focusing on or including information on Rob Schroder I believe this meets the definition of "significant press coverage." In addition, the fact that Wikipedia allows for stud articles about people like Ygnacio Martinez to exist, the former Alcalde of Yerba Buena to exist despite only have 4 sources, but targets my well-documented article is completely unfair. DenbyDoo (talk) 02:55, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

*Weak Keep The attack on him was very notable, I added in more sources. I'd do more, but was getting edit conflicts. I think this is an example of a page that needs work, not deletion. CT55555 (talk) 01:16, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

- WP:BLP1E would apply, then. Not enough to warrant a separate article. Sounder Bruce 01:23, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  BLP1E is for people who are in the media for only one event, who are otherwise low profile. He is in the media for more than one event, and so it does not apply. The essay at WP:NOTBLP1E explains this really well. CT55555 (talk) 01:30, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm changing my mind on this as I see the creator of it add in more uncited material and material not well connected to the subject. Delete. CT55555 (talk) 02:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you're referencing when you say "added more uncited sources." I would appreciate if you could point them out, but I feel everything mentioned is decently cited. DenbyDoo (talk) 02:56, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It would probably be easier if you just looked at the sections that didn't have any citations. Some examples of such sections:
Development

Homelessness

Protests

Committee assignments
Please consider the very basic baseline here that statements on Wikipedia need to be cited. CT55555 (talk) 03:00, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As the article creator I am bound to agree. I feel that there is enough coverage of this specific person to warrant the existence of this page, but as the sole author of this entry it is rather hard to document everything on my own. I feel it should be left up and allowed to be worked on by others interested in the topic. DenbyDoo (talk) 02:13, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would recommend you move this into draft and reconsider your approach to this article. Rather than write and then try to add citations, start by putting in only what is notable and specifically about the person. It seems like you're trying to make an article about him and a lot of other things at the same time and I think more time learning Wikipedia guidelines would help you. CT55555 (talk) 02:53, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was trying to style my article in the same way many wikipedia articles are written on US Presidents, they focus on events that occurred during their terms that they had a slight influence on. This can be seen in my articles by my references to the BLM mural, city baseball team, and assault as these are all events that directly involved or were pushed by the subject of the article. DenbyDoo (talk) 02:58, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Forgive me if my earlier tone is harsh. Wikipedia is a complicated set of rules.

The way to approach this to be successful is research the person. Look on Google News, Google Books, Google Scholar and see what high quality sources say about them. Then design an article based around that in draft. When it's ready, move into the main space. If you move into space before that is done, people will propose deletion.

I think if you move it into Draft, people can help you get it to standard. I'll volunteer to help. But right now, it's in the public space and you are inviting critique of it before it's ready. CT55555 (talk) 03:05, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I thought pages in the draft stage were only visible by me, I'm more than happy to move it to the draft stage if others can still help edit the page and make it more refined/presentable. :) DenbyDoo (talk) 03:08, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
People can see the draft if they know the url. Do yourself a favour and move it into draft, get it ready-sih and let me know and I'll help. CT55555 (talk) 04:30, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A WP:COATRACK of denigration to fit in the mural and citizen's arrest, along with a Ponzi scheme that the city had no knowledge of before it was uncovered. This has little to do with the subject himself and more to do with things surrounding him from a bunch of disgruntled citizens. Nate • (chatter) 02:44, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have to disagree. I contacted the mayor before publishing the final article and he confirmed he was satisficed with everything listed in the article and believed it was a fair and accurate depiction of events. If you would like to elaborate I'm open to it. DenbyDoo (talk) 03:02, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Though rare, a few notable protests have occurred in the city of Martinez under the leadership of Mayor Rob Schroder." Which had nothing to do with him or the city of Martinez in particular, and were not directed against him. The BLM protests would have happened no matter who was mayor or on city council. There's only mention of a bunch of attention-seekers trying to make a point. And now the original creator has moved this to draftspace to evade further AfD scrutiny. Nate • (chatter) 03:11, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I recommended he moved it to draft and work on it properly. I thought that was good advice. The author is clearly new and acting in good faith even if missing the mark. Let's be kind. CT55555 (talk) 04:33, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not to sound like I'm trying to make excuses, but the BLM protest happened because of the defacing of a BLM mural which was painted downtown Martinez with the express permission of permits that Schroder himself signed and sent for approval to the city manager which is why I felt it should be included, and the "Though rare, a few notable protests have occurred in the city of Martinez under the leadership of Mayor Rob Schroder." was a segway into the subsection, I was under the impression that was how you're supposed to do it, but I guess I was wrong. I'm still learning how to structure a page and publishing it was a mistake. DenbyDoo (talk) 05:44, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Mayor of Martinez, California, a city with the population of approximately 38,000, does not meet WP:NPOL. KidAd • SPEAK 17:01, 29 March 2022 (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.