Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Foy

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 06:00, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Foy[edit]

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

WP:BLP of a person notable primarily as a former mayor, not reliably sourced well enough to get him past the "who have received significant press coverage" part of our criteria for local officeholders. While it used to be the case that mayors were automatically presumed notable as soon as the city surpassed 50K in population, that's since been deprecated by a lot of more recent AFD discussions -- a mayor's notability is now much more purely dependent on how much sourcing and substance can actually be shown to actually get them over WP:GNG. But what we have for sourcing here consists of three primary sources, one article in his alma mater's student newspaper, and one (deadlinked) daily newspaper piece which wasn't about him, but merely namechecked his existence in an article whose core subject was somebody else. None of this counts as significant press coverage at all -- and there's a looooooooot of completely unsourced content about his personal life here, too, deep enough to suggest "insider knowledge" editing by somebody with a direct conflict of interest. This is simply not enough to deem him notable. Bearcat (talk) 18:01, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep a quick google search found me multiple reliably sourced articles [1] [2] showing that he considered running for senate seriously enough to be included in independent polls for the Senate race. The article definitely needs to be rewritten but that means fix it, not delete it. CJK09 (talk) 19:54, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Considered running for senate" is not a notability claim that gets a person into Wikipedia in and of itself — a person gets a Wikipedia article out of a Senate election by winning it and accordingly holding the office of Senator, not just by being speculated about in the media as a possible candidate but then not actually taking the plunge. Bearcat (talk) 23:48, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Foy was a mayor. A mayor is a public figure. However, this article does require some cleanup. SWP13 (talk) 09:32, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, mayors are public figures, but they're not all automatically accepted as notable public figures just because they exist — per WP:NPOL and WP:POLOUTCOMES, Wikipedia does not extend an automatic presumption of notability to public figures at the local level of political office. A mayor's includability on Wikipedia is contingent on being able to reliably source the article well enough to satisfy the "who have received significant press coverage" criterion. So no, we don't keep a poorly sourced article about a mayor just because cleanup might be theoretically possible — to be kept with a cleanup tag on it instead of deleted, it would have to be shown that the depth of sourcing needed to salvage it with does actually exist. Bearcat (talk) 17:12, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Mayors of cities of this size (57,000 people) are not usually considered to be inherently notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:19, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:07, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Nothing to satisfy WP:GNG that I can see/find. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:58, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I fully agree that the article needs work (a copyedit and reorganization would be a big improvement), but that's no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Plenty of sources available. Scanlan (talk) 12:54, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You can't just say there are plenty of sources available — anybody can claim that about anything even if there actually aren't. You have to show hard evidence that there are enough sources available to get him over WP:GNG — specifically by showing the actual, substantive results of an actual search for sources. Bearcat (talk) 18:19, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. There appears to be only a few local WP:RS sources about the subject. A redirect to List of mayors of Chapel Hill, North Carolina could also be appropriate. --Enos733 (talk) 18:18, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not large enough city to presume notability, no content in article demonstrates notability or non-local sources. Reywas92^Talk 22:50, 24 August 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.