Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dianne Jacob


 * 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. Tone 22:30, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Dianne Jacob

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Inadequately sourced article about a person notable only as a county councillor. As always, people at the county level of government are not handed an automatic free pass over WP:NPOL #2 just because they exist -- to qualify for a Wikipedia article, a county supervisor needs to show a volume and depth and range of reliable source coverage that suggests she's got a credible claim to being substantially more notable than most other county councillors. But this doesn't suggest that at all: it cites just six local media hits. of which three just include her giving soundbite in an article about something else rather than being about her for the purposes of helping to get her over WP:GNG, and three are from a community hyperlocal webmedia startup rather than a notability-supporting major media outlet. Every county councillor in North America could always show a handful of local coverage in the local media, so this is not enough coverage to make her a special notability case among an otherwise not inherently notable class of topic. Bearcat (talk) 15:53, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:54, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:54, 11 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Nothing to indicate this minor local politician is especially notable per WP:NPOL. No sources to demonstrate significant coverage. AusLondonder (talk) 00:25, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete county council members are not automatically notable; and there appears to be  no alternative claim to notability here. E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:09, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:03, 13 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:NPOL, WP:GNG. SportingFlyer  talk  00:51, 16 September 2018 (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.