Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phillip Jackson


 * 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. Consensus that the individual is not notable (primarily on GNG basis). While I think a straight delete close would have been reasonable with 4 !keeps and 2 !deletes, given the "weak" nature of those favouring Keep, a firm rough consensus seemed established. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:00, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Phillip Jackson

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable public figure (to use "politician" is debatable) per WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. KidAd (talk) 04:20, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:48, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:59, 23 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Non-notable political activist. It clearly fails WP:GNG. Lefcentreright  Talk  (plz ping) 14:20, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is a role listed here (Chicago Housing Authority) where I can see a theoretical path to notability if the article actually featured substantive content about his work in the role rather than just saying he held it — but there's nothing here that's "inherently" notable enough to guarantee him an article just because he existed, and one short blurb about his appointment to that job, one primary source and two pieces of routine local death coverage are not enough to get him over WP:GNG if they're all the sourcing you can show. No prejudice against recreation if somebody can actually dig out enough archived sourcing to do much, much better than this — but even GNG is not just "anybody and anything that can show two footnotes". Bearcat (talk) 14:27, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Week Keep - he has served a few government positions with the city of Chicago. Even city councilman in Chicago are able to have their own article.Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 20:03, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * His positions with the city of Chicago were bureaucratic civil service jobs, not elected political offices. Bureaucrats don't get an automatic notability freebie in the absence of much better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 21:38, 25 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per Bearcat. While it's certainly possible someone who heads a public housing authority for a city of Chicago's size to be notable enough for an article, Jackson hasn't received enough significant coverage to establish a notability pass. Best, GPL93 (talk) 22:40, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep He seems notable enough for a few prominent obits.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:09, 30 January 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.