Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mayor of Englewood, New Jersey


 * 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The result was   Nomination withdrawn as heading to WP:SNOW. LibStar (talk) 01:50, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Mayor of Englewood, New Jersey

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Lists of people are appropriate to create when almost all entries are notable ie have a WP article. otherwise we would be creating articles of list of non notable Mayors for every small town on the planet. LibStar (talk) 01:48, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:03, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:03, 20 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. We have articles Mayor of Ashland, Kentucky, Mayor of Boonton, New Jersey, Mayor of Charlotte, North Carolina, ... . I know OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not supposed to be an argument, but there is nothing making the office of Mayor of Englewood, New Jersey, any less notable than these other mayorships. So should all these articles be deleted? If you look at the Mayors of Englewood we have articles on, you'll see that their main claim to fame is ... having been the Mayor of Englewood! I'd say, if holding an office makes one notable, then the office is notable. --Lambiam 17:27, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Mayor of Ashland, Kentucky has mostly notable entries, so is fine to keep. LibStar (talk) 06:46, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep It meets every requirement of WP:Lists, you may want to note that most of the references are from obituaries in the New York Times. So everyone with a redlink can be a full Wikipedia article if someone wants to make one. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:05, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per References, and a usable List. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 19:18, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Reliably sourced, meets WP:LIST criteria.--JayJasper (talk) 04:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep- Interesting and more important all the persons named in the list are notable.User:Lucifero4
 * WP:ITSINTERESTING is not a reason for keeping. And no, not all people in the list are notable. LibStar (talk) 13:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep An encyclopedic topic that is backed by more than a dozen reliable and verifiable sources to establish notability. Alansohn (talk) 01:45, 25 October 2011 (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.