Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harold Hofmann


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Feel free to create a Redirect from this page title to the target article. Liz Read! Talk! 05:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Harold Hofmann

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Unnotable mayor of a small city, fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. Received some coverage upon his death, though I don't think that means anything. Previously nominated in the 48-article bundle at Articles for deletion/Fidel Vargas, closed as procedural keep due to the bundle's size. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 05:24, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and California. CptViraj (talk) 05:33, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: Long before his death, the LA Daily News wrote this about him in 2008, and the LA Times wrote this about him in 2010. Combined with this 2012 piece by the Daily Breeze (already in the WP article) and the various published reactions to his death, I believe he meets WP:N criteria. Left guide (talk) 07:02, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Military.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  11:53, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't think the previously mentioned articles are satisfactory seeing as they're all from local outlets. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 03:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Respectfully, I don't believe that a source being "local" disqualifies it from counting towards notability, especially when "local" in this case refers to a metropolitan area with 18 million people, with the Los Angeles Times being the sixth-largest newspaper by circulation in the U.S. (also significant enough as a source on Wikipedia to have its own RSP entry – WP:LATIMES). If such a clause disqualifying "local" coverage is written anywhere in the notability guidelines, please provide supporting evidence. Left guide (talk) 06:36, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * WP:ROUTINE disqualifies routine news coverage such as the first article. WP:AUD is specifically about companies and organisations, but specifically disqualifies local coverage. SportingFlyer  T · C  16:26, 21 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete I think this is closer than the other ones, but I don't think the coverage there is necessarily enough for an article. The first one is definitely just routine campaign coverage. The LA Times article isn't bad, though. SportingFlyer  T · C  16:24, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Redirect>>>>Lawndale, California, where he is already mentioned.Djflem (talk) 19:44, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per SportingFlyer's sentiments. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:08, 26 February 2024 (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.