Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maggie Brooks


 * 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  18:25, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Maggie Brooks

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:BLP of a politician notable only at a local level of office. This is partially a procedural nomination because the existence of this article was raised in the deletion discussion on her successor as a reason why that article had to be kept -- but county executive is not a level of political office that we consider "inherently" notable for the purposes of WP:NPOL #2, and after examining this article in depth I'm not convinced that it credibly gets her over the "more special than the norm" bar that she would have to clear to warrant an article. There are footnotes here, but about a quarter of them are primary sources that aren't support for notability at all -- and the stuff that is media coverage is exclusively local media coverage, of a type and volume that's merely expected to exist for officeholders at the county or municipal levels, and there's no evidence of the wider nationalizing coverage it would take to make her more notable than the norm for this level of significance -- and not all of those sources are even substantively about her, as some of them just casually namecheck her existence within coverage of other people or things. And the article content isn't making a strong case for her importance, either: there's stuff about her response to a tax revenue issue that's completely unsourced; there's content about somebody else submitting a piece of legislation that had bipartisan support where Brooks' only role was signing it into law (that is, doing her job); and there's content about a fraud scandal that took down other people in the county government, and didn't involve Brooks at all except as a giver of soundbite (and thus has nothing to do with making her notable). The only content that actually speaks to her potential significance has to do with forcing the public library to revise its internet filtering policies, which is not in and of itself a reason why a person in an otherwise non-notable role would be of enduring national or international significance. People also don't get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates for political offices they didn't actually hold, so neither having been considered but passed over as a possible running mate in gubernatorial elections, nor having run and lost in a Congressional election in 2012, makes her notable either. Simply put, nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to earn her inclusion in an international encyclopedia. Bearcat (talk) 14:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 04:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 04:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 04:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per the very well reasoned nomination of the nominator.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per Bearcat's quality reasoning. SportingFlyer  T · C  10:32, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep- This article is notable-19 references by newspapers and other sources. Dswitz10734 (talk) 21:31, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment User:Dswitz10734, please do not remove AfD tags from articles, thanks. RetiredDuke (talk) 15:14, 3 November 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.