Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alva Garey


 * 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 speedy keep. I, the nominator, withdraw my nomination, as it is clear that there is as much of a chance of this article being deleted as snowball making it through Hell. (non-admin closure) Mr. Guye (talk) 21:35, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Alva Garey

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails POLOUTCOMES. There is no further information online, so it can't be expanded. It is all ROUTINE, like database reports, genealogies, censuses, congressional registries, and Wisconsin logs. Also found were unrelated individuals named "Alva Garey". Delete. Mr. Guye (talk) 01:43, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 01:43, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 01:43, 3 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment Coin flip on delete/keep. Found reference to him on Google that confirms he was a 15th district WI Senator. Can't determine if source is reliable.  Cllgbksr (talk) 06:21, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep State legislators are notable; the Wisconsin Blue Book is published by the state of Wisconsin and is a reliable source. Thank you-RFD (talk) 10:22, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Alva Garey meets, in my view, WP:POLITICIAN. -- Dolotta (talk) 12:07, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Given the sources confirming his statewide elected office, he's notable. Alansohn (talk) 02:11, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep State senators pass the notability guidelines for politicians. Also the claim "There is no further information online, so it can't be expanded" is just plain near sighted. Sources do not need to be online to be used. While for some purposes old newspaper sources are discouraged, to show the notability of politicians, such newspaper sources are workable. I am sure there were newspapers somewhere in Wisconsin in the 1920s that spoke of Alva Garey. I am not sure that any of such newspapers still exist, but suspect they would be findable. It would take some work, but could be done. I would like it if we could say more about Garey's time in the state senate, but he is clearly notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:38, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Nominator's comment: Guys, a lot of the coverage is from primary sources. WP:BASIC says that doesn't count.--Mr. Guye (talk) 15:41, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep WP:POLITICIAN is a guideline that describes when an individual should be afforded presumption of notability because of the expectation that coverage exists. It is the view of the community that there is an expectation that state legislators would meet WP:GNG. In addition, WP:PRIMARY is not a blanket prohibition on the use of or sole reliance on primary sources. Instead, the policy clearly states "A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source." All that is needed is some verification that the individual served as a state legislator (which could be verified through election results, entry on the website [or archive] from the office they served, official minutes, roll call votes, or other official source that indicates their title. --Enos733 (talk) 21:17, 4 May 2017 (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.