Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Hoagland Slayback


 * 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. Consensus is that the coverage identified establishes notability. Michig (talk) 07:59, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

David Hoagland Slayback

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No notability at all WP:POLITICIAN Rusf10 (talk) 05:11, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand with info from the obit and the encyclopedia entry A NYT obit is a defacto recognition of notability. --RAN (talk) 05:13, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Baby miss  fortune 05:39, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Baby miss  fortune 05:39, 16 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't see much that needs to be kept. Googled and nothing much appeared. Sources were just mere mentions of him. Ernestchuajiasheng (talk) 06:49, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You have to actually read what you find. You missed a full page encyclopedia entry on him ... the current stubiness of the entry here should not reflect on him. And shame on deleters for not looking for additional sources or even considering a merge. --RAN (talk) 20:17, 16 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete I'm sorry but I am not seeing the WP:NYTDEFACTO policy anywhere. I do, however, see WP:NPOL and WP:GNG which agree we need multiple significant sources and/or national/international recognition. Unfortunately, a WP:BEFORE check has rendered no such evidence.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 08:01, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - Combined with the HEY upgrade and sources are more hard to come by, I am changing my !vote. I did not, however, cross out my original rationale because it is essential to understand a write-up in the NYT is not a de facto case of notability and anyone repeatedly asserting that needs to be trouted.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 19:36, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I can't even read the NYT obit, so what makes you such an expert since you don't show that you've seen it either? Maybe you should wait until you've shown you can adequately Google-search a topic using a NYT obit as a strong clue, before getting on your soapbox.  Unscintillating (talk) 03:20, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I am an inch away from reporting you for your total incompetence and personal attacks so I suggest you start changing your tune real fast. Every comment does not need to be graced with your pleasant response.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 06:50, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I searched NPOL and GNG, and there is no consideration for "national" or "international" sources in either one, much less in both. Further, Google sources are available internationally.  Unscintillating (talk) 23:00, 17 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. No, having an obituary in The New York Times is not an automatic notability claim in and of itself — as I've pointed out in other instances where RAN raised that claim, the NYT obituaried every single one of the approximately 3,000 people who died in the 9/11 attacks, but Wikipedia consensus deleted any resulting articles about people who wouldn't already have been deemed notable as of 9/10 for something other than dying. A former mayor of a place inside the NYT's local coverage area would simply be expected to get an obituary in the NYT, in exactly the same way as any mayor of anywhere would always be expected to get obituaried in their local newspaper — so the fact that the obituary is in the NYT does not automatically make the obituary more notability-conferring than an obituary in any other newspaper. The key to making a mayor notable enough for a Wikipedia article is to show that he's significantly more notable than the norm, by virtue of being able to show more and/or wider coverage than any other mayor could also show — and one obituary in the local media doesn't show that all by itself. It's a thing that any mayor of anywhere could always show, so a mayor of Verona doesn't get a notability boost just because his local media market happens to be New York City rather than Peoria. Bearcat (talk) 17:40, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * That was a one time special pullout section of the paper to commemorate the dead. These are daily obits where maybe 5 people are chosen each day of the thousands that died that day. --RAN (talk) 20:22, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * No, actually it was an extended series of regular obituaries published the regular way over the course of a few weeks, following which they were all repackaged together as a special commemorative pullout after they had already been run as normal obits first. Bearcat (talk) 21:37, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It is still a strawman argument. --RAN (talk) 22:41, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * No, it isn't — it speaks directly to the matter of whether or not an obit in the NYT is an automatic notability marker in and of itself. Bearcat (talk) 22:54, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It is a strawman argument when you ignore his other references and his biography in a reference book. --RAN (talk) 05:04, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You stated that an NYT obit was an automatic notability freebie in and of itself, and I responded to that argument on its face with a concrete and real example of why it isn't true. The only strawman here is you arguing that my argument is a strawman just because I didn't take into account sources that were never under discussion in the comment that I was addressing. Bearcat (talk) 05:59, 17 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Strong delete The article involves multiple violations of the not news policies of Wikipedia. I don't care if the information is 70 years or more old, if it is being quoted the way this is from a daily newspaper, it is still an attempt to insert news into the encyclopedia. There is no rule that says everyone who was given an obituary in the New York Times is notable even at present. The attempt to form this rule is built around the assumption that the status, meaning and methods of the New York Times have been constant, and that it has always been the paper of record for the USA. The reality is that it has never been as much a paper of record as its supporters want it to be, and that to assume that the obituaries of the NYT were about identifying only the top most notable people in 1942 is unsupportable. Anyway this is an assertion of a criteria that does not exist, and ignores the local market factors, something even more pronounced in the 1940s.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:50, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Please cite your Wikilink(s) for the "multiple violations of the not news policies of Wikipedia", so that I can analyze the degree of error in your conclusions. Unscintillating (talk) 21:49, 17 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment A search on Google books for [David H. Slayback] shows that this topic was already recorded to history at age 37 in 1898, long before he began his 24-year term as mayor in 1912.  The first Google snippet there reads, "DAVID H. SLAYBACK is enrolled among the progressive, practical business men who have been the architects of their own fortunes. He was born in Hunterdon county, New Jersey, August 27, 1861, and is a son of William Slayback. He spent the days of his boyhood and youth in Verona and acquainted himself with the English branches of learning taught in the public schools. At the age of seventeen he began earning his own living by working at the painter's trade, and later he..."
 * Unscintillating (talk) 21:37, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Unscintillating (talk) 21:37, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

"1885 he has been a member of the firm of Slayback Brothers, a well known and very successful company now doing business in Verona, Caldwell, and Little Falls. Mr. Slayback is President of the Verona Lake and Park Association, a corporation which recently purchased Verona Lake, Essex County, with adjacent land, and has highly developed the property as a refined popular resort. The directors of this association are David H. Slayback, Charles A. Williams, Anson A. Voorhees, ..."
 * Keep Continuing to read through Google books snippets, I see that other search terms are D H Slayback and David Slayback.  I'm not even seeing anything about his term as mayor immediately.  He became president of the Verona Park and Lake Association (see Verona Park for reference), sold ice from the lake, is probably part of the Slayback bros who acquired a flour mill there, is recorded in Chicago records as competing at curling, and developed the lake as a "refined popular resort".
 * Unscintillating (talk) 22:44, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Unscintillating (talk) 22:44, 17 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per very substantial coverage in a variety of independent sources. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:53, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Looking through information on "David H Slayback" living in Verona at that time in newspapers.com and elsewhere, it is clear that this is the same individual who led the largest US skating organizations from at least the mid 1900s to mid 1910s. I've added material on his work in that capacity and an image from 1904. Smmurphy(Talk) 21:46, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Smmurphy(Talk) 18:11, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Smmurphy(Talk) 18:11, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Smmurphy(Talk) 18:11, 20 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per HEY bringing sources satisfying SOGCOV.Icewhiz (talk) 19:05, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep The added references and NYT obit constitute significant coverage from reliable and independent sources. Nice improvements, also. 24.151.116.12 (talk) 19:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - Nice work improving the article. The man deployed an honest-to-god ROBOT FUCKING POLICEMAN and thus it is only appropriate to keep the article per WP:KERRRZAPPP. And, uh, thank you for your co-operation. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 20:52, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per some impressive improvements made to the article since it was nominated. Brad  v  23:08, 22 December 2017 (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.