Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clyde M. Johnston


 * 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 redirect to State Treasurer of Wisconsin. Although he technically meets WP:POLITICIAN, Bearcat's arguments that we simply don't have enough sourced content to write an encyclopedic article about him are convincing. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:02, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Clyde M. Johnston

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is not a notable person and so doesn't merit a Wikipedia article. Factfanatic1 (talk) 14:44, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Factfanatic1 (talk) 14:44, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:09, 17 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Having held office as the state treasurer of Wisconsin, doesn't this person fall within WP:POLITICIAN ("Politicians ... who have held ... state/province–wide office")? Cbl62 (talk) 15:58, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Red River  660   talk  16:16, 17 June 2020 (UTC) :This article would certainly fall under “major sub-national level” in this criteria. Red River  660   talk  16:16, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep State treasurer is definitely a notable position, and it falls within both WP:POLITICIAN and WP:POLOUTCOMES. Furtherly, per WP:POLOUTCOMES, "Elected and appointed political figures at the national cabinet level are generally regarded as notable, as are usually those at the major sub-national level (US state, Canadian province, Japanese prefecture, etc.) in countries where executive and/or legislative power is devolved to bodies at that level. See WP:POLITICIAN."
 * Keep The office of state treasurer of Wisconsin is notable and Clyde M. Johnston was notable-thank you-RFD (talk) 21:16, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete actual state treasurers are notable. However Johnston was the acting state treasurer. People who only filled a position as "acting" in general do not gain notability from it. I am surprised no one has ever challenged my creation of the article on the person who was acting president of Brigham Young University during Ernest L. Wilkinson's run for the senate. I forget the man's name, but would consider a deletion nomination if someone brought it up. I do not remember neough of his other biographical details to be sure if he would pass or fail, but I think acting anything is not enough to grant default notability, although in that case there may be enough sources, as I said I forgot his name and have not looked at the article in nearly a decade.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:45, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep: As the editors in this discussion have already stated, he is notable per WP:POLITICIAN. Lack of sources can be disregarded here considering that he belongs to the class of early 90s during which online articles were considerably less in numbers. Further, to find a source from that time is like finding a pin from a bush. There's no harm in keeping this article. Regards Pesticide1110 (talk) 10:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * We have no requirement that our sources be online. We can use print-only sources like newspapers and books and magazines and microfilms, so finding sourcing from the 1990s is not like finding a pin from a bush at all — it's like finding a pin in a pincushion. I don't even have any real difficulty finding sourcing from the 1890s when I need to. Bearcat (talk) 22:02, 19 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak keep Technically passes WP:NPOLITICIAN even though they were just in a caretaker role for three months. SportingFlyer  T · C  16:25, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. He passes WP:NPOLITICIAN.
 * Delete. Temporarily holding a role for a few weeks in an acting capacity is not a notability freebie that exempts a person from having to have some sourceable evidence of his significance in the role. Bearcat (talk) 22:00, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per WP:POLOUTCOMES. Although Johnston held the post for a little more than three months, he still held an important statewide office. He was the state's (temporary) treasurer. Lefcentreright  Discuss   20:40, 20 June 2020 (UTC) Changed Delete. Bearcat made a convincing argument.  Lefcentreright  Discuss   16:45, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The thing is, our articles about politicians are supposed to go into properly sourced detail about their political impact in the role, not just to document the technical fact that they held it — they're supposed to be encyclopedia articles, not just directory listings. There are certain roles where it's a foregone conclusion that such an article can be written even if nobody's put in the work yet — so the reason we keep some poorly written articles about politicians isn't that they're exempted from having to have that kind of content, it's that sources are available to add that kind of content with and thus make their article better than it is. But temporary acting holders of political roles don't necessarily have the same improvability, which is why they don't get the same presumption of "inherent" notability as the official holders of the office. The rule isn't that we always have to have a standalone page about every holder of X political office just because they existed, even if it's completely impossible to say or source any content about their political significance — the notability test for all politicians, even in the "inherently" notable roles, always hinges on the ability to write and source some substantive content about their work in the role, and never just on the ability to write "this person existed, the end" in and of itself. No matter what role a politician did or didn't hold, his notability still hinges on the ability to write and source content. Bearcat (talk) 15:22, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge and redirect into State Treasurer of Wisconsin. Not notable on the basis of his own career or actions in office but well worth mentioning there.  --Lockley (talk) 20:00, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   17:01, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep subject passes WP:NPOLITICIAN. The office of state treasurer of Wisconsin is notable Lightburst (talk) 17:16, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to State Treasurer of Wisconsin. He is not de facto notable for having just been an acting state treasurer for a few months. we have notability to ensure an encyclopedia article can be written (obviously), and here everything worth saying can be said at State Treasurer of Wisconsin. Right now all his article really says is that he was acting Wisconsin State Treasurer from October 1, 1948 until January 3, 1949, was appointed from staff, and had been a Wisconsin state employee since 1916 and had worked in the state treasurer office since 1920. as well as his birth and death dates. The treasurer list tells us that he was acting treasurer from October 1, 1948 to January 3, 1949 and was appointed from staff. Realistically everything worth keeping is already in the article. Perhaps a sentence could be merged into the note with a bit more detail but he certainly doesn't merit his own article. If there was evidence he did anything particularly notable this would be a different story. Best, Eddie891 Talk Work 21:57, 24 June 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.