Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert C. Gay

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 no consensus. We really need better guidelines on notability of LDS leadership. We've had a large number of these at AfD, and the results seem almost random, based on who happened to show up for any particular AfD. In any case, people at this AfD have not found a common ground, so NC. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:49, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Robert C. Gay[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)

Per source searches, this subject does not meet WP:BASIC. Coverage found in searches for independent, reliable sources is limited to passing mentions, quotations from the subject and name checks. Except for one source that provides a passing mention, the article is entirely reliant upon primary sources, which do not establish notability on Wikipedia. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The nominator misused the term "primary source". There is no way to call the published in magazines and newspapers going through editors sources here "primary". Beyond this, I have shown a source from Fortune all about Gay's retirement from HGGC. I have also found multiple indepth sources about his connection with Mitt Romney, and strongly suspect there is more out there. This [1] on Gay might not add much, but it does show another way he gets coverage. We have this article on a speech he gave at UVU [2]. This [3] Salt Lake Tribune article mentions Gay. There are lots of mentions of him under the name Bob Gay in relation to Unitas and Microfinance. I am still looking for a true indepth study, but there are lots of mentions that may add up to something. There is much more there.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:24, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Below is a synopsis of the sources presented in the !vote directly above. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:35, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[4] – A profile page that provides some coverage
[5] – Consists mostly of quotations from the subject. There are only four sentences of non-quotation content. In my view this is not significant coverage.
[6] – Has one sentence about the subject. This is not significant coverage at all.

Comment This [7] contains multiple mentions of Gay.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:45, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Here [8] we have a book mentioning the Romney doing the intense search for Gay's daughter episode. Here is the Bloomberg entry on Gay [9].John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:05, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets notability guideline "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded". deisenbe (talk) 10:31, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Deisenbe: You are citing a threshold at Wikipedia:Notability (people), not the basic criteria. Please see WP:BASIC and also the fallacy of WP:INTERESTING. --Bejnar (talk) 17:09, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails to have substantive coverage. Also I see no claim to "significance". Neither being a general authority of the church, nor a member of the Seventy provides inherent notability. --Bejnar (talk) 04:05, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, most coverage the subject has received consists of mentions, rather than significant coverage, and there is no presumed notability for religious leaders. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:44, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 00:12, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kpg jhp jm 15:33, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment See also the remarks at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hugo E. Martinez (3rd nomination) regarding no inherent notability for these positions, especially the remarks of editor Bakazaka. --Bejnar (talk) 17:09, 12 October 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.