Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William G. Rohrer

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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Rusf10 (talk) 18:25, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

William G. Rohrer[edit]

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

was WP:PROD, tag was removed by USER:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). fails WP:POLITICIAN, unsuccessful candidates are not usually notable. Can't find much on this guy outside of his donation to Rowan University. Rusf10 (talk) 16:38, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- His contribution to Rowan University was made posthumously, so I don't know if he is really a philanthropist as the article suggests or he just left the university some money in his will.--Rusf10 (talk) 16:47, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 16:50, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 16:51, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 16:51, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 16:51, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The quality and quantity of the references meet GNG. --RAN (talk) 17:33, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Smmurphy^(Talk) 17:52, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - Sorry, I accidentally delsorted this to history, although it is not a terribly good fit. In any case, I agree that there is sufficient coverage that this article passes WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, etc. Smmurphy^(Talk) 17:54, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Did a little WP:HEYMANN sourced to long obit in the Philadelphia Inquirer. I wish to add, as I have seen some highly-regarded editors say on other AfDs about politicians in the last few weeks, that Nom, User:Rusf10 needs to slow down and WP:BEFORE bringing so many politicians to AfD so rapidly. In particular. It essential to search a news archive when trying to determine notability for public figures whose careers are pre ~2000. And it is often better practice to tag an article for sourcing and notability and leave the tags in place for 6 months or a year as an act of WP:AGF on the part of the editor who wrote the article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:11, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, I will withdraw as per WP:HEYMANN, although I respectfully disagree with you on some of my other nominations. Also, in this case, the author who wrote the article has not been active in almost two years, so I doubt they would come forward with more sources.--Rusf10 (talk) 18:23, 19 December 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.