Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony R. Mills


 * 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. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:36, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Anthony R. Mills

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested Prod. Non-notable local politician. Fails WP:POLITICIAN--Lacks "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article" (emphasis mine). Valfontis (talk) 15:31, 11 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete, as nominator. I'm sure he's a great person and does a lot of good things, but he's not notable enough yet for a Wikipedia article. Valfontis (talk) 15:37, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:POLITICIAN.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  20:02, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - none of the sources are of the type to confer notability, and the "offices" he holds fail to confer notability. Aboutmovies (talk) 20:14, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete as evidence of notability. →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  20:37, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:27, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:27, 12 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete, possibly Snow Delete Nothing that even vaguely resembles notability. Zero support here; recommend snow close. John from Idegon (talk) 22:58, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * If the highest level of office he's held is the county planning commission, then that's not an office that confers notability on its holders under WP:POLITICIAN — the lowest level of office at which a person automatically qualifies for an article just for holding it is the state legislature. (Politicians at the local county or municipal levels of government may qualify for articles in some circumstances, but are not entitled to an automatic "just because he exists" presumption of notability.) Article relies a little too heavily on primary and unreliable sources, and the few good sources about him are not enough to demonstrate that he's cleared the high bar for notability of local politicians. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 16:54, 18 May 2014 (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.