Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of mayors of Horný Vadičov


 * 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 merge to Horný Vadičov. While not unanimous, valid AtD that no one is actually contesting. Star  Mississippi  18:53, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

List of mayors of Horný Vadičov

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

List of mayors of a very small village in Slovakia. Seems too obscure to warrant a Wikipedia article. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 17:04, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Slovakia. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 17:04, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Huh huh huh, Beavis, you said "horny". Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 17:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I understand what you are saying, and I even thought that myself when I made the page. The article is up to date and really the best it can be, so it really would be relevance that deletes the page.
 * That being said the reason I went ahead with creating the page is because it is the town's history. I wanted to bring the article Horný Vadičov up to B class and add the history of the town to the page. Without listing off a bunch of mayors in the government section which would just make the article too long, I decided to just make a new sub-article List of mayors of Horný Vadičov. Johnson524 (talk) 18:44, 28 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. The primary purpose of a Wikipedia list is to help people find Wikipedia articles — and while it's true that a list of mayors is allowed to include some unlinked names on the grounds of completeness as long as there are other bluelinked names in it to actually provide a rationale for the list's existence, a list that comprises entirely unlinked names, because nobody in it is notable enough for their own standalone biography at all, is entirely pointless. And a list also needs to be referenced to some evidence of reliable source coverage about the people, not just to content self-published by the place's own municipal council on its own website about itself. Bearcat (talk) 20:37, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I disagree with this description of the purpose of a list article. A list can be encyclopedic on its own, even if it contains entirely unlinked names. I think there is value in keeping and developing lists of elected officials (including mayors), and other content that expands upon primary source material. From a researcher's perspective, a list of mayors could be helpful in knowing what name to search for (even outside of this project). In cities that have partisan elections, a list of mayors could be helpful to visually identify trends in the city's voting habits. Lists of mayors could help researchers identify "firsts", even if the individual subject would not otherwise be notable on their own. - Enos733 (talk) 16:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That claim would seem to contravene policy, which does not describes that as the primary purpose of lists.Djflem (talk) 13:18, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  11:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge: You make good points Bearcat, and I agree with you it might not deserve it's own article like I mentioned earlier. I wouldn't say the information is "entirely pointless" though, and I will, while not the whole list, try to fit the key bits of information back into the main article Horný Vadičov. --Johnson524 (talk) 02:29, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:33, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete, doesn't even seem to meet WP:GNG. GTNO6 (talk) 09:46, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Satisfies LISTPURP. Djflem (talk) 13:20, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Merge as suggested. Bearian (talk) 13:13, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree. I don't think the article needs to be deleted because it is not a bad article, but if it is not relevant enough to be kept I would at least merge it. -- Johnson524 (talk) 14:16, 8 June 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.