Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bo Sullivan (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. Killiondude (talk) 00:38, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Bo Sullivan
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsuccessful gubernatorial candidate who lost in primary. Fails WP:POLITICIAN Being Chairman of the New Jersey Turnpike also is not a claim to notability (I'm not even sure what was accomplished while he was there). Rusf10 (talk) 17:00, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:BEFORE B states, "Carry out these checks", and B4 states, "Read the article's talk page for previous nominations and/or that your objections haven't already been dealt with." Doing so leads to:
 * Then there is
 * The Amazon page shows that this book has the two reviews needed to make the book itself notable, also saying that it is written by two Rutger's professors. I can't see the text, but a 2006 reviewer writes, "Bo Sullivan and the Turnpike are bundles of unrestricted energy. The New Jersey Turnpike shapes the state...It is the busiest toll road in the nation."
 * So given WP:BEFORE, why are you asking "I'm not even sure what was accomplished while he was there"? Unscintillating (talk) 00:50, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The proposed widening project discussed in the above article never came to be. Although, I wouldn't use it as a reliable source, it is explained here - "One widening project proposed in the late 1980's never came to pass. Specifically, a 1987 plan advanced by the New Jersey Turnpike Authority called for an expansion of the western spur from its current six-lane (3-3) configuration to a twelve-lane, 3-3-3-3 configuration. The plan also called for construction of a new interchange, "EXIT 15 W-A," for an extension of NJ 17 approximately one mile south of EXIT 16 (NJ 3)." If it had been completed then it would actually be an accomplishment. As far as books are concerned, if you can read the book and properly cite it fine, but we're not going off a book review.--Rusf10 (talk) 01:12, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * We? Who is "we"?  Unscintillating (talk) 01:26, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The proposed widening project discussed in the above article never came to be. Although, I wouldn't use it as a reliable source, it is explained here - "One widening project proposed in the late 1980's never came to pass. Specifically, a 1987 plan advanced by the New Jersey Turnpike Authority called for an expansion of the western spur from its current six-lane (3-3) configuration to a twelve-lane, 3-3-3-3 configuration. The plan also called for construction of a new interchange, "EXIT 15 W-A," for an extension of NJ 17 approximately one mile south of EXIT 16 (NJ 3)." If it had been completed then it would actually be an accomplishment. As far as books are concerned, if you can read the book and properly cite it fine, but we're not going off a book review.--Rusf10 (talk) 01:12, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * We? Who is "we"?  Unscintillating (talk) 01:26, 29 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - his nytimes obituary also mentions that he was also finance chairman of the New Jersey Republican Party and co-chairman of Bush Sr. presidential campaign in New Jersey. Looking at news articles from the 1980s, I see a lot of coverage of him from that period. To me, an article about the subject could clearly pass WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, etc. The current version is little better than the 2013 article originally nominated for discussion, but the reasons to retain the article are still pretty clear to me. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:51, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I've updated the article a bit, giving more detail about his early life and mentioning his work with the 1988 Bush transition team. Some of the references I added are quite in depth about Sullivan, for instance:, , , and . Three of those are in New Jersey papers, but the second one is from the Philadelphia Inquirer, suggesting in depth interest in Sullivan beyond New Jersey. Regarding whether or not his accomplishments were important, in my opinion the current article supports the idea that he was a significant player in the New Jersey and national Republican Party throughout the 1980s. Smmurphy(Talk) 02:22, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The Philadelphia Inquirer regularly covers New Jersey politics due to its proximity to south jersey and Trenton.--Rusf10 (talk) 02:26, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * True enough, but in some form his performance at the Republican National Convention was covered in dozens of papers in nine states (including NJ and PA): . Smmurphy(Talk) 02:35, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:51, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:51, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:06, 28 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep excellent referencing with the NYT obit. --RAN (talk) 03:47, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * So excellent, that's why they referenced it three times.--Rusf10 (talk) 04:05, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * "They"? Unscintillating (talk) 05:57, 29 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete unsuccessful candidate for the governorship, so that is not a sign of notability. Since New Jersey is in the circulation area of the NYT, an NYT obit for a New Jersey figure is not a sign of notability. Nor is being campaign co-chair for a state sub-section of a national primary election campaign.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:45, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete, passing trivia; does not meet GNG guidelines for stand alone article and Wikipedia is not a newspaper; see WP:Not News. Kierzek (talk) 14:25, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * There is no such New York Times rule in the GNG. --RAN (talk) 13:57, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTNEWSPAPER states, "news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics". Unscintillating (talk) 01:24, 29 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment I have added the following to the Further reading section of the article:
 * Unscintillating (talk) 00:50, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Unscintillating (talk) 00:50, 29 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep The substantial coverage in reliable independent sources over many years establishes notability. FloridaArmy (talk) 08:10, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Here is one of the sources from the previous AfD, the one showing an Amazon page:
 * Unscintillating (talk) 08:59, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Unscintillating (talk) 08:59, 29 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Keep as per the previous unanimous AfD; and the sources found there, reposted here, and listed in the article, which satisfy GNG.  Unscintillating (talk) 08:59, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep The article makes a case for his notability and backs it up with reliable and verifiable sources about him. Kudos to all those editors who have not only voted keep but have worked to expand and improve the article with the sources that further evidence notability. I am intrigued that The New York Times, a national and international newspaper that covers the world and the 23 million residents of the New York metropolitan area, has been downgraded by JPL to the status of a local paper, and the same by Rusf10 for The Philadelphia Inquirer, but any excuse for deletion to ignore reliable and verifiable sources. Alansohn (talk) 18:10, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment- Most of the coverage of Sullivan seems to be related to his failed campaign. The precedent for this is "Losing candidates for office below the national level who are otherwise non-notable are generally deleted." see WP:POLOUTCOMES--Rusf10 (talk) 18:39, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Rusf10, you're just repeating yourself. His primary notability as Turnpike Authority chairman, though all from you is a baseless assertion that the position is not notable. Yet at Articles for deletion/William Howe Davis, which you nominated yourself, that position seems to be contradicted by consensus. Any reconsideration of your unsupported stand? Alansohn (talk) 20:58, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:POLOUTCOMES says something else. The first bullet at WP:POLOUTCOMES says that cabinet-level appointed political figures of states are generally regarded as notable.  Unscintillating (talk) 21:23, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Chairman of the New Jersey Turnpike is NOT a cabinent-level position.--Rusf10 (talk) 23:05, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * In 2017, no they are not. In the 80's it might have been.  That was before the Turnpike Commission and the Parkway Commission merged and they were independent bodies. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:19, 3 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep Sustained coverage in independent, reliable sources is certainly in compliance with the WP:GNG. The claims that coverage in national-level sections of the New York Times is not significant due to WP:LOCAL is not consonant with that essay (which is about places of local interest anyway). The sources in Philadelphia Inquirer and other generally WP:RS mean that claim is not controlling in any event.  Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:19, 3 January 2018 (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.