Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Koh


 * 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. Michig (talk) 09:19, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Daniel Koh

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Individual does not appear to meet WP:GNG. There is some coverage in the Boston Globe, but no other publication. He fails WP:NPOL. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:27, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:27, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:27, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. Being chief of staff to a mayor is not an WP:NPOL-passing role: it's the type of role that might get a person over NPOL #2 if they can be well-sourced as the subject of enough reliable source coverage to credibly claim that they're special cases of significantly greater notability than most other mayors' chiefs of staff, but not a role that guarantees him a Wikipedia article just because a small handful of purely local coverage exists in the local newspaper where such coverage is merely expected. People also don't get articles just for being unsuccessful candidates in political party primaries, or for being smalltown municipal selectmen, so footnotes #2, 5, 6 and 7 aren't bolstering his notability at all — and the paid-inclusion wedding announcement isn't evidence of notability either. Bearcat (talk) 15:37, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per Bearcat. Doesn't meet WP:NPOL or the coverage threshold for a local politician to meet WP:GNG. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:00, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete chief of staff to a mayor is not inherently a default notable position, no matter where the mayor is mayor of, and the coverage is not enough to show notability otherwise.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:51, 26 June 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.