Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mayor of Chesterfield

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. Deletion and recreation would be needless bureaucracy; there is clear consensus that this page is appropriate for inclusion. Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:27, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mayor of Chesterfield[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)

Delete. This list was created by a blocked user who seemed to specialise in niche subjects of dubious notability. My reading of WP:NOT suggests that this list is indiscriminate information as hardly any of the names apparently warrant an article. Izzat Kutebar (talk) 09:10, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Who created the piece has no factor in whether the piece should be deleted or not. In addition, this is not an “Indiscriminate” list. The individuals are “elected” officials of a specific location. Article is sourced and maintained. ShoesssS ^Talk 13:24, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 15:03, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 15:03, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:CSC. The list of mayors of a particular city or town can be verifiably complete and provides the "retention of encyclopedic information" while each mayor may not warrant a separate article. While it is unfortunate that the article was created by a blocked user, the subject of the article/list is clearly notable. --Enos733 (talk) 16:43, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As argued above this is not an indiscriminate list and is content that would be expected in an encyclopedia. Equally, the fact that few of the holders have articles does not mean the post is insignificant (this is in fact not uncommon for articles of this type). Dunarc (talk) 20:19, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator withdraws the case. I accept that my rationale was incorrect and I think this case should be closed. I'm more than happy to abide by consensus. Useful learning for me so a good exercise. Thanks to all who have contributed. Izzat Kutebar (talk) 20:49, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural delete for denial of attribution, without prejudice against another editor recreating it. The question of whether the role would be notable enough to get its holders over WP:NPOL as the subjects of biographical articles or not is quite separate from the question of whether we should keep a verifiable list of their names or not — there may be a case to be made that we shouldn't, but the ability of the mayors to satisfy NPOL as standalone biographies isn't relevant to it. The blocked user thing means we do have to withhold attribution from the blocked editor, but it doesn't preclude an editor in good standing recreating it so that they get the attribution instead. Bearcat (talk) 18:32, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
WP:REVERTBAN suggests that articles created by banned users "are eligible for speedy deletion," but deletion is decided by a case by case basis. I am ok with a procedural delete if the closer recreates the article at the time of closing if we want to withhold attribution from the blocked user. Enos733 (talk) 17:55, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I have no problem recreating. Already have it in my sandbox. Just let me know when. (To be honest, I hate taking credit for it though). ShoesssS ^Talk 18:46, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Enos733: WP:REVERTBAN does not apply, the user was not banned. Sam Sailor 01:09, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bearcat: Yours is the only outstanding "delete" !vote. I have never heard about "Procedural delete for denial of attribution", where in the PAGs do you see a basis for that? Sam Sailor 01:09, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A well-defined list, that has the potential of becomming a valuable navigational aid, WP:NOT dosen't come into play here. Should be moved to List of mayors of Chesterfield. Sam Sailor 01:09, 6 July 2018 (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.