Talk:Tigard, Oregon

Merger of list
In response to the placed on the article, I figure I'll at least explain my reasoning for creating this article in the first place. There was a redlink on Tigard to a list of mayors (likely as part of the city template at the time), so I decided to make it blue. I agree, most of these guys aren't now, nor will they likely be notable enough in the future to be given full articles. I will point out however that there are 196 articles in the category Category:Lists of mayors, many of which are massively full of redlinked names, and likely aren't any more notable than Tigard is. --Billdorr 03:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Egad, 196? I think I'll just stick to my little corner of the Wiki and look the other way. However, in turn I'll point out WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. It's also a little odd that the only two Oregon entries are Portland and Tigard. Nothing against Tigard, but if it's going to have a list there's a least a dozen other places in Oregon that ought to have one too. I like the way it is in the Eugene, Oregon article, with the list of mayors in the government section. So I'd rather see the info from this list moved to the Tigard article. But don't take my prod personally--if you think the article should stay, I won't contest it if you remove the prod. Katr67 04:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Like I said, I created the article only because it was redlinked on the Tigard article, and since the city infobox template has been changed to no longer include a link to List of mayors of, a merge might not be a bad idea.  I could have sworn there was at least one Oregon city other than Portland and Tigard that had a mayor list here, but it would seem not so anymore.  I think maybe the only reason to keep the two articles apart is to prevent vandalism on this list.  As it is, it doesn't stand out on the main Tigard article by being just a single link further down the page. --Billdorr 06:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, that was 196 on just the first page. There were 68 more on the second (which, actually seems quite low for Wikipedia).  I don't think you'll see much argument that a historic list of this type is not notable.  As for whether it belongs in the city's article, or in a stand-alone list; that is a style issue best solved by mergeto not prod.  That's why I pulled the PROD tag. Neier 09:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * As the list is rather small I say merge. Plus I don't think it meets notability requirements to be a free standing list. Third, it will be very likely that few of the red links will ever get links, as unless these mayors are notable for something else they will not have articles. Aboutmovies 19:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. There isn't strong opposition to the merge on the talk page of the list either. Katr67 19:16, 12 June 2007 (UTC)