Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip N. Gumbs


 * 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 redirect to List of Monmouth County Freeholder directors.  Sandstein  11:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Philip N. Gumbs

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

small town mayor and county freeholder, does not meet WP:NPOL guidelines. Rusf10 (talk) 02:01, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - Minor politician who doesn't clear the bar. -R. fiend (talk) 02:54, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 02:01, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 02:01, 27 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to List of Monmouth County Freeholder directors, he pretty clearly does meet WP:NPOL or GNG, but he is listed in a table at the target so redirecting seems like the best solution. Devonian Wombat (talk) 06:57, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep appointed judge at state-level or redirect to List of Monmouth County Freeholder directors (plus a first). Bad BEFORE. Djflem (talk) 10:53, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neither smalltown mayors nor county government freeholders get an automatic free pass over WP:NPOL just because they exist, and being the first member of an underrepresented equity group to accomplish those things in his own county, but not even close to the first in the entire nation, is not in and of itself an instant notability clincher in the absence of the depth, range and volume of media coverage it would have taken to get any other smalltown mayor or county freeholder over the bar. And even judges don't get an automatic inclusion freebie just because the body they served on was technically "statewide" — a state Supreme Court judge would obviously be notable, but workers compensation tribunal judges aren't "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to get over WP:GNG on the sources. Even our notability standards for judges, per WikiProject United States courts and judges/Notability, still distinguish between the senior courts and the junior or specialty courts, and grant no notability freebies to the latter. Bearcat (talk) 13:20, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Clearly there is an Alternatve for deletion (two, actually the above mentioned and Mayor of Aberdeen Township, New Jersey), which is preferred by Wikipedia. It is interesting to note that at Wikipedia:WikiProject United States courts and judges/Notability: Revision history it appears one editor wrote it. That history and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States courts and judges seem to lack any examples of where discussions where community consensus was achieved. Are there any? Djflem (talk) 14:04, 27 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete Policicians at this level are not default notable and we do not have the level of sourcing to show notability otherwise.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:06, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect Would !vote delete based on the above delete !votes, but the redirect page seems very plausible. SportingFlyer  T · C  03:43, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete so far - Not a prominent enough position to convey inherent notability. I googled and I'm not seeing significant coverage in secondary sources. So delete. Ikjbagl (talk) 05:38, 4 May 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.