Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lili Bosse


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:07, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Lili Bosse

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

This is a non-notable local elected official. She is only mayor because she is a city councilmember in a city that rotates the office of mayor annually among the councilmembers. Nearly all of the references are to The Beverly Hills Courier, a free weekly paper in her city. The page does little to establish her notability. It's largely a collection of routine or trivial actions by a typical city councilmember. She neither meets WP:POLITICIAN nor WP:GNG. On a side note, the article currently reads as a promotional page for this politician, rather than a neutral article. OCNative (talk) 13:34, 18 October 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  13:41, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women,  and California. Shellwood (talk) 14:38, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep There seems to be plenty of non-trivial coverage of her, once you add it all up. Including in Vogue. Many Beverly Hills mayors have articles on Wikipedia, and she seems to have enough press about her to qualify. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 16:51, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - the coverage of Bosse extends well beyond The Beverly Hills Courier. For example, I find two articles in a German paper from Berlin with one extended coverage on Bosse, and a second on her 2014 interactions with the Sultan of Brunei; the Los Angeles Times also regularly covers Bosse (e.g., ). Any concerns about tone can be edited and are not grounds for deletion (Deletion is not cleanup). DaffodilOcean (talk) 18:16, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:03, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep per Pyrrho the Skipper and DaffodilOcean. WP:RS-compliant sourcing is sufficient to pass WP:SIGCOV. Sal2100 (talk) 20:30, 2 November 2022 (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.