Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamin G. Blake


 * 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. Randykitty (talk) 08:15, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Benjamin G. Blake

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NN local mayor, fails WP:POLITICIAN Toddst1 (talk) 02:55, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:03, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:03, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep I strongly disagree and I believe that he meets WP:POLITICIAN. I find plenty of articles on him with a quick google search. Just because an article is undeveloped does not mean it is not notable. Milford is one of top 20 largest cities in the state, so media coverage is frequent. Mjs32193 (talk) 22:05, 28 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. Milford CT is not large enough to confer an automatic notability freebie on its mayors just because they exist — that bar measures only the population of the city itself, not its ordinal size-rank within its own state. But the majority of the references here are primary sources that are not support for notability, such as raw tables of election results and his "meet your mayor" profile on the city's own self-published website about itself, and the few that are actually real media are purely routine local verification that he was elected, and then re-elected, and then re-elected again. That's a type of sourcing that every mayor of everywhere can always show whether they actually clear our notability standards for mayors or not, so it isn't notability-making coverage for a mayor in and of itself: the notability test for a mayor is the ability to write a substantive article about his political impact, not just the ability to verify that he exists. And just saying there are other sources out on the Google isn't the magic bullet, either: just like the election results themselves, not every web page that happens to have a mayor's name in it is automatically a notability-building source. Mayors can still have their existence namechecked in articles that aren't about them and thus aren't support for their notability; mayors can still have their names mentioned in blogs and webforums and other unreliable sources that aren't support for their notability; mayors can still fail to receive coverage that expands anywhere beyond just their local newspaper; mayors can still coincidentally happen to have the same name as other people whose coverage is irrelevant to the mayor's notability. So the notability test still isn't just saying there are other hits out on the Google: it involves showing actual, specific examples of what you think might be notability-boosting coverage, so that we can actually evaluate whether they actually boost his notability as much as you think they do. Bearcat (talk) 16:06, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Giving all mayors of the top 20 cities in every state a free pass on notability would give us 1000 notable mayors at any given moment, just in the United States, and in some states would be truly scaping into very small places. Are there even 20 places in with a mayor in Alaska?John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:47, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Being the mayor of one of the 20 largest cities in his or her state is not an automatic WP:NPOL pass. Additionally, in order for politicians to meet GNG they must receive more than just routine local coverage. Best, GPL93 (talk) 11:58, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per GPL93 (talk). In this case at any given moment, a free pass on notability would give us 1000 notable mayors. --SalmanZ (talk) 22:17, 2 July 2019 (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.