[go: nahoru, domu]

Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Braxton Lloyd

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:14, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Braxton Lloyd[edit]

Braxton Lloyd (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Biography of a person notable only as mayor of a town not large enough to hand its mayors an automatic presumption of notability per WP:NPOL. He could still have an article if it could be sourced well enough to satisfy the "who have received significant press coverage" part of our criteria for local officeholders, but the sources present here aren't showing that at all -- of the five references here, two are simple transcription lists of all the headstones in a local cemetery, one is a 40-word blurb on a genealogy website, and the other two are just brief namechecks of his existence in articles about the town rather than him. This does not constitute evidence that he's been the subject of enough reliable source coverage to support a Wikipedia article. Bearcat (talk) 17:25, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:26, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:26, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:32, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Mayors of cities of this size are not usually considered to be inherently notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:21, 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]
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.