Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A. M. Leary


 * 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. The article's subject is found to not be notable. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 09:07, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

A. M. Leary

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability claim is being mayor of the town of Minden, Louisiana (population <15k). Sources are (1) an offline list of mayors (2) a genealogy website (3) a local obituary and (4) a brief mention in a contract document regarding construction of a water-works system. Zero evidence of any significant WP:RS third-party coverage whatsoever. Update While there now appear to be more sources (similar to the aforementioned sources), now half of the article is about Leary's (non-notable) children. OhNo itsJamie Talk 15:09, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Size of city is not a factor. Local politician. Ised on-line sources available. He left office in 1905. Other sources would be off-line in newspaper microfilm c. 1905. Was active Democrat politician for FDR and served in HOLC. Billy Hathorn (talk) 20:19, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment According to this, city size is indeed a factor, especially when you are talking about a town this small. Both WP:GNG and WP:NPOL stress "significant press coverage", which is clearly not demonstrated here.OhNo itsJamie Talk 21:43, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete The press coverage is both extremely local and not ever more than we would expect for the mayor of such a small city.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:52, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Not at all. The press coverage is regional and there is quite a bit on-line for someone who left office 110 years ago. Other sources to which I am not privy would be off-line. There are 15 sources, including mention in a book and an engineering journal as well as newspapers.Billy Hathorn (talk) 17:03, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment The number of sources doesn't matter (especially when several are about Leary's non-notable children). Please read this footnote regarding non-trivial coverage from the WP:BIO policy page. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 17:21, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
 * His obituary is written by The Shreveport Times in 1937. In the past, an obituary written by the news department has been considered proof of notability. Billy Hathorn (talk) 19:06, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Please show me the policy link where I can find the rule that says "having an obituary written by the news department proves notability." Having an obit written in a non-local newspaper would suggest national notability (i.e., if the NY Times printed it), but that's no the case here. OhNo itsJamie Talk 14:29, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Notability is not necessarily national, and it is not in the Leary case. Here is a recent example of the Texas rancher Gene S. Walker, Sr., who was held notable because of his front-page obituary in The Laredo Morning Times. The distinction is an obituary prepared by the news department, rather than submitted to a newspaper by a funeral home. Billy Hathorn (talk) 16:36, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * So you don't have a policy page link and your just going to make up notability criteria. OK. OhNo itsJamie Talk 16:45, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Is this what you mean by policy link?
 * No, that is a link to a prior AfD discussion. Examples of policy links include WP:GNG, WP:NPOL, etc. OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:14, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Here's another example where local coverage was sufficient for notability. Billy Hathorn (talk) 17:17, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * 2.Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage. 3. Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article". -- The subject, A. M. Leary, is independent of the coverage. He left office 110 years ago and died 78 years ago. His obit was written by The Shreveport Times staff. Billy Hathorn (talk) 17:24, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.Billy Hathorn (talk) 19:08, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions.Billy Hathorn (talk) 19:09, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Keep, passes WP:GNG with multiple independent sources.--TM 17:35, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Question How many of those sources include more than a sentence about the subject (versus passing mention or articles about his children)? OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:50, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * There is one major source on Mayor Leary (The Shreveport Times obituary) and one on his father. In the other dozen or so sources, he is mentioned. I was able to piece together a full story. The Shreveport Times obit is what establishes his notability. Other sources that might be tapped would be off line in newspapers of 1904 or 1905. Billy Hathorn (talk) 23:08, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 09:52, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Having a source on Leary's father does not establish notability for Leary.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Reply. The information on his father was essential to show how Mr. Leary came from a prominent family. Billy Hathorn (talk) 00:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Notability purely related to his work in a very small town, which does not equal real notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:44, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Reply. Notability guidelines do not mention mayors or sizes of their cities. It says local politicians with proper references; this article has all the references that are available. Billy Hathorn (talk) 14:47, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * We do also use common sense, not just dogma. No sourcing except local guff that you'd expect in local papers. You could find that about pretty much anyone holding any office anywhere. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:04, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Reply. Yes, common sense would mean that this article meets the requirements. Or it could not have been written without the sources found. Billy Hathorn (talk) 16:29, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes GNG. Additional guidelines about the size of the town are therefore not necessary. Let's not invent guidelines for the sake of it. I've seen an argument above saying that many of the sources are not in-depth discussions of the subject. This may be the case, but breadth of references across many different reliable sources can offset this. This "the town is too small" stuff has to stop. That criterion was intended for topics that do not pass GNG but are still somehow notable. A lot of small town people rely on Wikipedia to learn the history of their place of birth. Let's keep it that way. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paperpencils (talk • contribs) 19:37, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Rewrite if kept I was asked by the author of the article, who I do not know, to comment on the AfD. It seems that it's content and sources are largely of genealogical value, which is not the purpose of an encyclopedia article. If it's kept, it should be rewritten to exclude the findagrave.com sources (i.e., content is generally added by contributors, and there's no editorial control), which are not reliable sources, and at least one genealogical source. It seems that there's marginal notability.-- CaroleHenson (talk) 20:28, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Struck out a part, I don't know him/her, but I just realized that I made a comment on another article.-- CaroleHenson (talk) 22:25, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Reply. At least two of the genealogical articles cited are newspaper or history book articles obtained through findagrave. Mr. Leary left office 110 years ago, and I have done an exhaustive search for materials on him. He falls under "local politician with adequate sources." Billy Hathorn (talk) 00:01, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Based upon your comment, I went and did a thorough review of the article and found: 1) there was a fair amount of content uncited, 2) most of the content is based upon findagrave.com info-some of which is a typed version of a newspaper (vs. digital image of the newspaper) - which means all of the findagrave.com information is in doubt, and 3) there is only a small amount of information from reliable sources- once that his put something out to bid as mayor and another regarding relationships to cousins. There's also a fair amount of content about other family members that get off topic of this subject of the article. I now change my vote to Delete, there's very little substantive information from reliable sources about A. M. Leary. I tagged the places where better sources are needed or where content was not cited, for potential improvement.-- CaroleHenson (talk) 03:15, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * 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.