Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walter C. Quintard (2nd nomination)


 * 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:55, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Walter C. Quintard
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Quintard was mayor of South Norwalk, at a time when the population seems to have been under 20,000. In the last discussion, only the size of the city was discussed. However, this just establishes we need good and adequate sources to show notability. So lets look at what we have. Source number 1 is the Political Graveyard listing of the mayors of South Norwalk. Here is the same website's listing for Quintard. This is not generally considered a reliable source, especially to show that someone was notabel. Source #2 is a listing of the mayor's of Norwalk, which I can't access, but it does not seem to be more than just a directory listing. Sources 3 and 5 are from FamilySearch, both primary documents, one is Quintard on the 1880 census, and we are not prepared to create articles on everyone who shows up in the 1880 census, the other is the death register for Quintard, we are also not prepared to create articles on everyone who died in Connecticut. The one remaining source is an entry in the index to a journal of Quintard's brother-in-law from a tripod.com hosted site. Even if this was an entry in an index to a journal published by a university press, being mentioned in the notes of a journal is not a default sign of notability, not even having your journal or diary published by a university press gaurantees notability. Tripod.com is however user generated content, so this is even less of a sign of notability. So what we have here is a city that in no way gaurantees default notability for mayors, and all sources are either primary, non-reliable, or directory listings. We totally lack the level of sourcing needed to show notability. John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:00, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete- If all that can be written about this guy is two sentences, he's not notable enough. He clearly fails WP:POLITCIAN and WP:GNG. Also, the previous AFD was improperly closed, it should have been taken to DRV. The result should have been either another relisting or no consensus, not Keep.--Rusf10 (talk) 22:42, 4 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Strong delete - Not even a biography. Just a few sentences that this guy existed. Acnetj (talk) 00:08, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  16:08, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  16:08, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  16:08, 5 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep obviously a signifanct figure in the history of Norwalk. He was its 2nd mayor and served a 2nd term after the firdt mayor returned to office in between. He was also senior partner in a major carriage firm. Also had a role in the history of Ridgefield and the founding of the parish and episcopal church in Norwalk. Numerous sources on Google Books. I expanded the article some and added a few of the book sources. Whether the subject should be merged to an article on the city's mayors is another question, but deletion would be improper. FloridaArmy (talk) 17:38, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:POLOUTCOMES and GNG; sourced to incidental references and user-generated genealogy websites Chetsford (talk) 20:51, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Everybody who was ever mayor of anywhere at all could always claim, by definition, to be significant to the history of that place. So we don't keep an article about a mayor just because somebody asserts that he was significant to the history of his own town or city; we keep it if he can be reliably sourced as the subject of enough media coverage to clear WP:GNG. But the sources here aren't demonstrating that — all of the ones that were already present before yesterday are complete trash, and the ones FloridaArmy added yesterday all just namecheck his existence in lists or tables of election results, and are in no way substantively about him. A mayor does not get to keep an article just because we can technically verify the basic fact that he served as mayor: he needs to be the subject of coverage in his own right, which none of the sources here are showing that he has been. Bearcat (talk) 18:59, 6 February 2018 (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.