Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Juhl


 * 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. Courcelles (talk) 00:23, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Sam Juhl

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Mayor of a town of 1200 individuals only notable for being elected at age 18, fails all other relevant notabilty guidelines, especially wp:blp1e Pokerkiller (talk) 17:04, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Toffanin (talk) 20:53, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. Toffanin (talk) 20:54, 10 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete, not notable enough to warrant an article of its own; too trivial. Kierzek (talk) 02:08, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:35, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Week Keep - WP:POLOUTCOMES suggests that traditionally, "politicians who (a) represent a historic first" are kept. According to List of the youngest mayors in the United States, the subject is one of eight mayors elected at the age of 18. Elected officials should not be seen as mere "trivia" because of the important role they play in developing public policies. - --Enos733 (talk) 16:54, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm sure that is meant for mid level politicians, not small town ones Pokerkiller (talk) 19:07, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mayor of a very small town. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:51, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - even if true, it's still trivial. Bearian (talk) 18:39, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mayor of a very small town. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:51, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * If a place was sitting on the borderline of an NPOL pass or fail (e.g. the mayor of a place that fell short of but was close to the 50K criterion for mayors, or a place that fell short of but was close to the "metropolitan global city" criterion for city councillors), then "youngest-ever holder of this office" might be enough to tip the balance (though that would still be no guarantee). But nothing in Wikipedia's inclusion rules for politicians grants an automatic freebie to the youngest-ever holder of office in a small town — every city and town in existence will always have had at least one mayor who was younger than any of the others, and then one who was older than any of the others too — so a criterion like that would mean that every single place on earth that has ever had mayors (of which there have been hundreds of thousands) would automatically confer guaranteed wiki-inclusion rights on at least two of its former mayors. So that can't be an inclusion criterion by itself, for a town that's this small, unless (very maybe) there's a lot more coverage of it than has been shown here. As well, the "historic firsts" thing in WP:POLOUTCOMES is actually an outdated criterion which has been deprecated by evolving consensus, and should actually be removed from OUTCOMES. (Even the first-ever LGBT mayor of a small town — which is much closer to what that criterion was originally designed to cover than "youngest" is — doesn't automatically get a Wikipedia article for that anymore, if the town isn't large enough to get its mayors over NPOL the conventional way and the person can't claim overarching significance like "first LGBT person elected to political office in his entire country".) So there's simply not enough substance here to make him more notable than the norm under NPOL just for happening to be a town's youngest-ever mayor. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 18:43, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Same as Articles for deletion/Christopher Seeley (2nd nomination), article is non-notable and is very trivial. MrWooHoo (talk) 00:08, 18 September 2015 (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.