Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James McIlvenna


 * 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. The only "keep" argument, "Mayor of a regionally important city", is a weak one in the face of guidelines and practices that say that such offices do not establish even a presumption of notability.  Sandstein  19:35, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

James McIlvenna

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Biography of a person notable primarily as mayor of a smallish city, not properly referenced as passing WP:NPOL #2. Mayors are not handed an automatic notability freebie just because they're minimally verifiable as having existed -- the notability test for a mayor doesn't hinge on the ability to verify a few stray biographical facts by finding his obituary in a newspaper, but on the ability to write a substantive article about his political significance: specific things he did, specific effects he had on the development of the city, and on and so forth. But this features essentially none of that, and doesn't cite nearly enough coverage to deem him as passing WP:GNG in lieu of having to satisfy the notability criteria for mayors. Bearcat (talk) 19:49, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 19:49, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 19:49, 1 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete not every past mayor of every city that currently has over 50,000 people is notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:29, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - mayor of a regionally important city. Bearian (talk) 21:48, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Just calling a city "regionally important" is not a notability freebie that exempts a mayor from having to get over WP:NPOL #2 on his sourceability, or from the article actually having to contain any substance about his political impact. Bearcat (talk) 15:07, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, HistoricalAccountings (talk) 13:20, 9 February 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 05:11, 17 February 2021 (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.