Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chula Vista mayoral elections


 * 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 and redirect to Chula Vista, California. Spartaz Humbug! 21:50, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Chula Vista mayoral elections
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Chula Vista is not a major city. Its mayoral elections are not significant enough to pass WP:NEVENT. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:59, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  SharʿabSalam▼  (talk) 23:08, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  SharʿabSalam▼  (talk) 23:08, 15 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete Agree that we should not automatically expect articles for every small city/large suburb, especially if it's just a results table linked to the official primary source. A potential Mayor of Chula Vista article could support this content but Chula_Vista,_California with link to that source is enough for a non-major city. Reywas92Talk 23:47, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Chula Vista is on of the top 100 cities in USA population wise; this election of a 1st of a Latina.Djflem (talk) 06:31, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep The 2014 election is notable by being the first time a Latina was elected in its city's history. Likely additional sources are available. --Enos733 (talk) 16:02, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , nothing you said addresses WP:GNG or WP:NEVENT. I looked for sources only found one noting the result. The election of the first Latina in Chula Vista doesn't automatically make this notable. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:12, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * There are more RS, one which specifically mention major cities. POLOUTCOMES doesn't speak directly to elections, though it does it does mention firsts.Djflem (talk) 17:20, 20 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Sources do exist for its expansion. For instance the 2014 article could be expanded using https://www.kpbs.org/news/2014/oct/08/jobs-top-issue-race-chula-vista-mayor-council-memb/ and https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-2014-chula-vista-candidates-debate-2014oct08-story.html and https://timesofsandiego.com/politics/2014/11/04/salas-mccann-leads-in-chula-vista-mayor-council-races/ and https://www.baltimoresun.com/sdut-chula-vista-city-council-election-results-2014nov04-story.html The 2018 election could be expanded using https://www.nydailynews.com/sd-se-chula-vista-mayor-election-20181012-story.html and https://www.10news.com/news/chula-vista-mayoral-candidate-called-anti-muslim and https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2018/mar/13/stringers-anti-immigrant-tweeter-wont-change/ SecretName101 (talk) 22:58, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete It is not the primary city in its metro area, so it really does not warrant separate articles for each election. The mayor of Chula Vista is rarely mentioned in media outside of California, so it's unlikely that such a race would be covered with original reporting (not the reprinted wire feeds as shown above).  Sounder Bruce  04:35, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * That the Daily News & Baltimore Sun carried the stories is not to be discounted.Djflem (talk) 19:22, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep the nature of the election, the issues raised and the broad range of coverage received for the election (as listed in the article and as described above) satisfies WP:NEVENT. There are huge numbers of election articles that should be deleted; this isn't one of them. Alansohn (talk) 19:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:19, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete we do not need articles for every local election that occurs globally and this local election was only locally notable. Some mayoral elections will receive greater than local notability and those can be kept. The Baltimore Sun and NY Daily News are not actually national coverage - those articles were clearly written by local San Diego journalists and were re-run on those websites, possibly as part of an affiliate program - we've seen this before with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution hosting online local content written elsewhere and for a different community. At best this should be merged into a "Mayor of Chula Vista" article. SportingFlyer  T · C  20:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * San Diego paper is "regional", not "local". It was an editorial decision by two major East Coast newspapers to print news they found to be significant and national. There's no need to speculate about the other stuff.Djflem (talk) 10:00, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Topics do not become more notable just because some newspapers outside the local coverage area happened to make an "editorial decision" to reaggregate a bit of wire service coverage originating in the topic's own local area. For either the Baltimore Sun or the NY Daily News to count as notability-bolstering coverage on "nationalizing" grounds, those papers would have to have sent their own journalists to Chula Vista to generate original coverage that existed separately from the wire-serviced local stuff. Bearcat (talk) 13:01, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Was the news of the election carried in two East Coast newspapers? Yes. Is standard "papers would have to have sent their own journalists"..."to generate original coverage" stated anywhere in Wikipedia? Please provide link.Djflem (talk) 02:53, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
 * It wasn't actually carried in two East Coast newspapers, which is the issue - we're not applying an arbitrary standard here because we don't like it. A Newspapers.com search for the Baltimore Sun shows this article was not printed. The sources you found were Tribune wire articles, written in San Diego, and added to a database that most Tribune websites pull from. For instance, or  - notice how the sd-se-chula-vista-mayor-election-20181012-story.html is the same in all of those? The article hasn't actually been printed in any those newspapers, they're just Tribune Publishing newspapers, it takes the story and wraps it in that newspaper's outline. As an example, I randomly clicked on, currently in the news, and changed the URL to  and bam, the story comes up. Clicking the Chula Vista tag or the author's name in any of the articles doesn't bring anything up, further proof it wasn't actually of interest to anyone on the east coast. SportingFlyer  T · C  04:23, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your response. That "papers would have to have sent their own journalists" and "to generate original coverage" was the claim I was curious about.Djflem (talk) 19:45, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   07:49, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete While I appreciate the effort to make Wikipedia a useful source, Wikipedia is not a news website. Maybe election records could be kept for larger cities, but as some users pointed out above, Chula Vista isn't a particularly large city. To users pointing out this was an important election - perhaps add a stub tag and start adding content about why this was important. I haven't heard anything about these elections on my local news. WallabyWombat  ❯❯❯  Let's Talk!  09:36, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 09:58, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge in a very limited form to Chula_Vista,_California. A regular election in a mid-size city cannot satisfy WP:NEVENT and the coverage demonstrated is not significant. "The first X elected to Office in Place"-type articles are only notable if the office in that place is already notable and Mayor of the 76th-largest city is not automatically notable. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 04:01, 6 May 2020 (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.