Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee N. Fiedler


 * 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.  Sandstein  14:21, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Lee N. Fiedler

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NPOL as a small-town mayor without significant press coverage and WP:GNG. Tagged as needing additional BLP sources for 8 years now. SportingFlyer  talk  05:16, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 14:00, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 14:00, 25 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete the city has 20,000 people. The mayor is a part-time position, that alone generally screams "holding this position is a sign of non-notability". Not that full-time mayors are default notable, but part-time mayors are very rarely such. Nothing indicates that Fiedler is a notable individual.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:03, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Admittedly the town is fairly small, but Fiedler may barely meet GNG with articles like this Wall Street Journal profile on the family. It seems he may be more notable as a CEO than mayor. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs ) ~ 16:38, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Cumberland MD is not large enough to hand its mayors an automatic presumption of notability just for existing, but the article isn't sourced well enough to get him over WP:NPOL #2 as the subject of more than just routine local coverage. There may potentially be enough notability as a CEO to get him past our inclusion standards for businesspeople, but one Wall Street Journal article about his family is not enough in and of itself to clinch that — and it would also have to be shown, not merely presumed, that the depth and volume of sourcing needed to make him notable for that actually exists. Bearcat (talk) 19:31, 28 May 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.