Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geno Martini


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:08, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Geno Martini

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:POLITICIAN, with just local coverage. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:03, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:14, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:14, 1 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. No wide coverage, thus fails WP:GNG. Notability has not been met. Also fails WP:POLITICIAN. -AuthorAuthor (talk) 17:25, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete at this moment Fails WP:NPOL and the sourcing does not appear to meet WP:GNG. Subject was the mayor of Sparks, Nevada, population 90,000 in 2010. While I think there might be sufficient material about the subject to pass GNG - so it is more than "he exists" - I don't think the sourcing is there yet. --Enos733 (talk) 21:57, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete It is not merely the size of a city that governs if the mayor is notable. A city like Sparks which is a secondary city within a metro area is much likely to propel the mayor to notability than an equally sized city that is the main city in its region or area.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:45, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. As it stands, the entire article boils down to "he exists and he has Parkinson's disease", which is not how you make a mayor notable enough for a Wikipedia article — you make a mayor notable by adding and sourcing substance about his political career, not his health status. Sparks is large enough that he could be accepted as notable if the article actually contained meaningful content, so no prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can write an article with more real content and less fluff, but it's not large enough to make him "inherently" notable for the purposes of making it necessary to keep this. Bearcat (talk) 02:22, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete It appears that he does not meet WP:GNG and WP:NPOL due to no wide and significant coverage. Taewangkorea (talk) 03:11, 5 September 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.