Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David M. Rock


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 11:58, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

David M. Rock


WP:BIO has a threshold of being a state provincial representative unless there are multiple non-trivial press mentions. Just 2 Ghits here, Wikipedia and his Council. Delete. TerriersFan 21:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - "David Rock" plus "Elgin" brings up 226 ghits here. Some of those are of Elgin, IL, but still alot more than two include this article subject.  --Oakshade 23:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - those hits relate to a variety of David Rock's around the world. "David M. Rock" plus "Elgin" here brings up nothing more significant. What counts is not the number of Ghits but how many of them are are relevant and significant. In the US, with its active and well-developed media, any politician that is notable should be getting large numbers. TerriersFan 23:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


 * A state representative? The two-sentence "article" indicates that he is a native of Canada; clicking Central Elgin reveals that he was the mayor of a Canadian town of about 12,000 people. Take your pick - we can urge a Speedy delete for lack of context, urge delete for failing WP:BIO, or urge delete because two sentences do not a Wikipedia article make. B.Wind 02:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm usually an inclusionist on these matters, but I'm not certain this entry is worth keeping. No vote, but will accept community consensus.  CJCurrie 19:47, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable. Material could easily fit into Central Elgin if an editor thought it worth keeping. DrKiernan 14:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * While it's not formally enshrined in policy, AfD precedent has generally favoured keeping articles on municipal mayors, and there hasn't been a population cutoff to determine notability — I'm sure that places no larger than Central Elgin have had their mayors' articles kept without being any longer or more detailed than this. I know precedent isn't necessarily binding, and I think maybe there should be an actual policy discussion to formally clarify whether mayors are in, out or "depends on the circumstances" at some point, but a keep wouldn't be unprecedented here. Which doesn't necessarily mean I'm urging that here; this is unquestionably a pretty barebones stub about a person whose notability is uncertain at best. No vote; just $0.02 for the pot. Bearcat 23:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete precedent is for mayors of ;large cities and towns to be kept but I think this is under the threshold. Eluchil404 10:10, 6 December 2006 (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.