Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norman Goodhead


 * 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. The author of the one "keep" opinion is now blocked.  Sandstein  06:31, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Norman Goodhead

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article about a person notable only as a mayor of a suburban township, not reliably sourced as having enough media coverage to clear WP:NPOL #2: the only reference present here at all is a single obituary upon his death. As always, the notability test for municipal politicians (even mayors) is not simply the ability to single-source the fact that they existed; it is the ability to write and source a genuinely substantive article about their political impact, and the idea that a mayor whose article isn't doing that still gets an automatic inclusion freebie anyway, just because the town or city eventually surpassed an arbitrary population cutoff, was deprecated years ago as no longer applicable to mayoral notability anymore. Bearcat (talk) 18:42, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:43, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:43, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete a non-notable local politician.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:16, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:42, 26 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. But could be borderline notable. I did a search and found some additional references. I think should kept but needs improvements.--AfPEN (talk) 09:21, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not enough to just say you found some additional references, because (a) anybody could say that about literally any article topic, including total hoaxes, if all they had to do was say it, and (b) not every possible source is a good one. If you expect the existence of other sources to turn the tide in an AFD discussion, you have to show the sources you found, preferably by actually adding them to the article itself but at least by listing some of them here, so that participants can actually evaluate how much difference they do or don't make. Bearcat (talk) 16:43, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * User blocked for undisclosed paid advocacy. MER-C 09:24, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:24, 29 March 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MarginalCost (talk) 14:34, 5 April 2019 (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.