Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helen Mayhak

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. Redwolf24 (talk) 01:32, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Helen Mayhak

Not notable, unless really old people in local elective office is notable. Paul 15:18, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

• weak delete she is also "very controversial" but there is not enough information on the controversy to indicate notability. A link to a news article or something would help. — brighterorange (talk) 17:19, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Merge to Hartford Township, Michigan. In light of the slight expansion, I no longer think this should be deleted. However, the sums of money involved and the comparative notability of this person mean the material should be merged into the township's article. For one thing, it will benefit from the greater context there. , I suppose, or a weak delete if that helps consensus since I can't turn up much evidence for great controversy over $3000. -Splash 22:03, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Elected officials are at least as relevant as college professors, and we keep those. Kelly Martin 19:16, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - meets my notability criteria. The fact that we don't have enough info is grounds to add {{expand}} to the article, not grounds to delete it. Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 19:19, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - I started this stub when I was newer here, and never got around to adding to it. I feel she is notable because she was the only township clerk for 40 years. I think she's as notable as a small town that has a pole barn on Main Street (Yes, that describes Hartford). I never got around to expanding it though. I would have no problem with merging it, however. This is one of those things that you would not hear much about on the internet. Oh, and that reminds me, I need to expand these stubs about towns near me... :) --Phroziac ^(talk) 19:21, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. All that is asserted is that 1. She held a quite insignificant post (albeit for a pretty long time), and 2. She got senile. Wow. I thought this was an encyclopedia. -R. fiend 20:02, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

  Would you atleast try to be nice about it? If you haven't noticed, I actually care about the project. I don't sit around making rude comments to people who write articles I don't like. --Phroziac ^(talk) 20:49, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Verifiable, informative, passes the professor test. arj 20:04, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Next will be an article on the old lady who gives out boxes of raisins instead of candy on Halloween. Gamaliel 20:10, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

  ....... --Phroziac ^(talk) 20:49, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, needs expansion, but there's enough there for a stub. Steve block talk 20:19, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per R. fiend. Fernando Rizo T/C 21:01, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, she's a town clerk, for God's sake! Do we want an article on every town clerk and other minor government official for every level of governmehnt in the world, throughout all of history? Get a grip. Zoe 21:05, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

  We have an article about every pokemon, throughout all of history. By the way, see WP:NPA. --Phroziac ^(talk) 21:24, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

  Indeed we do. Is that a good thing, though? -Splash 21:32, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

  WP:NOT paper. No, it's not a good thing, but why should this be deleted and those allowed to stay? --Phroziac ^(talk) 21:36, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

  There doesn't presently look much chance of this being deleted any more than the Pokemons (and I don't think it should be, as I said). It's often said "but if my article A is deleted, then articles B–Z-in-unrelated-field ought to go too, because they are surely less notable". Should we judge articles by the lowest common denominator, or the highest? Which way lies the raising of standards? Would inclusionists or deletionists favour LCD or HCD, or neither? The fact is that there is a considerable body of editors prepared to defend Pokemon to the hilt — and to face-down those that claim it lowers standards with the claim that comprehensiveness is everything. The same seems not to be true of articles on real people, for some reason. I don't personally subscribe to either philosophy absolutely. Oh, and notpaper is notfree. $165,000 of the $200,000+ just raised is to be spent on hardware. -Splash 22:00, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

  As much as I hate wikipedia's pokemon policy, it's still not a fair comparison. When selling town clerk cards becomes a billion dollar industry I'll change my vote. -R. fiend 18:17, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, merge with Hartford Township, Michigan or delete both this, Hartford Township, Michigan and every Pokemon-article for a particular pokemon beyond Pikachu. Be consistent, people. --Kaleissin 21:10:26, 2005-09-08 (UTC)
• Weak keep, and spend the time we're wasting here taking a flamethrower to Pokemon fancruft. User:Kelly Martin has done a good job to expand, and how many 91-year-old town clerks are there who held the record for service and cost thousands through poor performance? --fuddlemark (talk) 21:39, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Merge with Hartford Township, Michigan. Minor government officer for a township with a population of 3000? OK, she held the post for 40 years, but it's not exactly Mayor of New York, is it? Local colour, and should be merged as such. As for the professor claims, I don't believe we keep articles on every single professor, only those with a notable publication record. So merely doing the job for years doesn't qualify them. Neither does padding out the article, which is what the minor financial losses (about $2 dollars per person) would count as to me. A $4000 dollar loss isn't exactly news. Average Earthman 21:40, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep — Dan | Talk 21:52, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Comment With all due respect to Mrs. Mayhack, I suspect the only difference between her and any other petty politician was that she was too old to hide a $4000 discrepancy. Paul 22:43, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

  Heh. *Usually* you don't lose that much in a small town, or atleast that I've heard of.... By the way, I suppose you all feel the same about the local mayor who shop lifted? And no, it's not in the same town. --Phroziac ^(talk) 22:57, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. This is nicely quirky article that is nevertheless fully referenced. It has at least one source that is a focused report of her and her activities, and which is cited. Meets minimum WP:N, WP:V standards. I dislike the way the WP:V, WP:RS, WP:NOR standards have been run down or totally disregarded these days, but this article is not one of the transgressors.—encephalonέγκέφαλος  23:04:01, 2005-09-08 (UTC)
• Keep: Asserts and proves notability. Owen× ☎ 23:11, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I'd say this subject would seem (from a cursory glance at least) to be notable enough for an article on WP - hell, I've seen articles on far less notable people kept here on AfD, and from that precedent I think I would advise best to keep and expand this article as appropriate.--NicholasTurnbull 23:33, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Merge. Seems notable enough to be on wikipedia, but unless more information is added, probably does not need its own article. Bushytails 23:53, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep The longest serving elected official in the history of the State of Michigan is obviously notable. For some deletionists, any person less than the Risen Lord Jesus Christ fails a notability test. --Nicodemus75 11:24, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: Good point, perhaps we should delete Jesus. He may have died a horrific death, but it was common at the time and WP:NOT a memorial. And he may have preached a lot of stuff, but since the majority of those who claim to follow him don't pay any attention to his teaching, surely his lessons must have been n-n. :-) Last Malthusian 11:56, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
    • There is no proof for Jesus' existence or for any of his exploits. Delete as a hoax. ;) Gamaliel 09:33, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
      • Perhaps a speedy candidate?--Nicodemus75 10:16, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
        • I speedied Jesus as a hoax a while back (unverifiable claim to being "King of the Jews"), but he just got undeleted three days later. Sheesh. Fernando Rizo T/C 04:48, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete A town clerk? By all means tell me what I'm missing... Marcus22 15:01, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

  Perhaps that the person held that position for half a century? That's 1/20 a millenium. --Phroziac ^(talk) 21:38, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

• Merge with article on township. Wikipedia is not a memorial, not even for "controversial" minor government officials.---CH (talk) 04:16, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep notable Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 07:26, 14 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.