Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Honey Benjamin


 * 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. BD2412 T 04:48, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Honey Benjamin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The only claim is mayor of Kollam which is not enough for her passing notability guideline. The article fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 11:24, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 11:24, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 11:24, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 11:24, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. Although Kollam is large enough that we would likely accept its mayors as notable if the articles were substantive and well-sourced, there is no city in the world where mayors are handed an automatic notability freebie just for existing as mayors without regard to their substance and sourcing. If all you can do is write that she exists, the end, and all you can show for sourcing is one article about her initial appointment to the role and three glancing namechecks of her existence in articles that aren't about her, then you have not gotten her over the notability bar that mayors have to pass. Bearcat (talk) 18:47, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. The scant Google results are deceptive - I ran a newspaper archive search and found a whole bunch of articles from The Hindu and the New Indian Express. She's mayor of a large city, she's got the coverage to boot, and the only reason we're having this discussion is because apparently the main newspapers in her part of the world suck at having their articles indexed by Google. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 09:35, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep After [User:The Drover&#39;s Wife|The Drover&#39;s Wife]] findings. IphisOfCrete (talk) 18:46, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, , The hit on the New Indian Express is WP:ROUTINE coverage of the election results. There are a few more (bunch of) news hits that are covering the mayor's announcement of some routine mayor works. My personal assessment is this subject fails WP:NPOL  and should be deleted, but I can be swayed if there are indeed good sources. I dont think there are.  D Big X ray ᗙ  06:57, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
 * There's not "a hit" from the New Indian Express. There's at least a hundred article hits between it and The Hindu. They're just not indexed in Google for whatever reason. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 09:39, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , for the benefit of the AfD, it is expected that you will share a few of them here so that others can review.  D Big X ray ᗙ  09:43, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm accessing them through a subscription service (NewsBank). I can't copy and paste them without violating copyright, but many editors will have access to either that or similar newspaper databases that cover India. We determine notability through the sources that exist, not just the ones that are available in Google/on unpaywalled internet sites. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 09:47, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The major newspapers are available online in India. Both The Hindu and the New Indian Express mentioned above are available online. I do understand your point but without actually looking at these articles I cant change my stand. I will stand by my own assessment.  D Big X ray ᗙ  10:27, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Clearly only some articles are available online, if you can find one with Google and I can find a good hundred with a news archive search. Notability is not determined by what sources you personally have access to: if you don't have access to any library archives, that's going to be a great many sources. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 10:47, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
 * There is still a question of quality of coverage in those search links.  D Big X ray ᗙ  12:51, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per The Drover's Wife. Bookscale (talk) 23:42, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   19:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to a suitable article about the municipal corporation should be good here. Mayors in India are generally heads of the municipal corporation body. This is important information to keep, but not necessarily as a standalone article. May I suggest to redirect this article to a page about the Kollam Municipal Corporation? This seems to be very similar to Articles for deletion/V. Rajendrababu where we do have the news articles regarding the mayor in context of daily municipal activities, but perhaps not enough about the person itself.--DreamLinker (talk) 01:39, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect and merge to Kollam Municipal Corporation, per DreamLinker's proposal. The article seems unlikely to grow beyond a stub, and the information could easily by included in the "Mayors" section of the Kollam Municipal Corporation-article. If someone wants to create a more substantial article in the future and the sources exist, it can always be restarted. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 14:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete and list it under Kollam_Municipal_Corporation. KartikeyaS343 (talk) 08:45, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , it is already listed in the link you gave.  ⋙–D Big X ray ᗙ  08:47, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * In that case, I agree with the suggestion made by . Kollam Municipal Corporation can be expanded. KartikeyaS343 (talk) 08:49, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep per The Drover's Wife; certainly winning a significant election by a single vote is noteworthy. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  20:49, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per The Drover's Wife. Good work passes WP:GNG. Lightburst (talk) 18:49, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:26, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Sources in article suffice GNG.--Goldsztajn (talk) 11:03, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Sources in article suffice GNG or WP:BARE Wm335td (talk) 20:41, 9 March 2020 (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.