Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rita Kalmbach


 * 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. It would be great to have more opinions, but on the basis of three existing votes the consensus is clear.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:22, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Rita Kalmbach

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a rural mayor who doesn't automatically pass WP:NPOL for the role. She might qualify for an article if the sourcing were actually good enough to get her past WP:GNG, but virtually all the references here are either primary sources, press releases or local community media which is not widely distributed enough to count as evidence of encyclopedic notability (and even if they did, there aren't enough of them to pass GNG with.) Further, the only source here that passes muster, the Toronto Star, is sourcing a general fact about the municipality she was the mayor of, while not actually mentioning her name at all — thus failing to be any sort of coverage, substantive or otherwise, of her. I'd be willing to withdraw this if the sourcing could be majorly beefed up, but this, as written, ain't cutting it. (Best part: the special section which clarified, before I stripped it as trivia, that before and after her term as mayor her short form honorific title was "Mrs." Wow, who would have guessed?) Delete. Bearcat (talk) 04:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 04:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 04:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:19, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Far short of being notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:36, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 00:30, 20 August 2014 (UTC)




 * Delete - I share the nominator's concerns. I couldn't find anything that would substantiate a pass against WP:GNG.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 02:15, 20 August 2014 (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.