Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruth Atkin

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 as a non-notable political figure, as per WP:BIO. (aeropagitica) 22:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ruth Atkin

ATTENTION! If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether an article is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting heads (or socks). You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}.

Mayor of a town with <7000 inhabitants. Not notable enough for separate article. Delete exolon 19:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Akradecki 19:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• VERY strong keep it is a hugely important town, it is a regional upscale shopping and entertainment area surrounded by massive oakland and famous berkeley, it is home to dozens of global pharmaceutical companies and also pixar animation studios, its like saying santa monica's mayor is not imporant. Mayors are always notable! Qrc2006 19:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Santa Monica has a population in excess of 100,000 and we don't have an article on their mayor either - Robert Holbrook. exolon 19:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Also this isn't a debate about whether the town is notable, it clearly is and it has it's own article which is fine. The debate here is whether the mayor is notable in her own right. exolon 01:29, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and possibly add more material about her to Emeryville, California. My Alt Account 19:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete As the son of a former small town mayor (albeit larger than Ms. Atkin's town) myself, I have to agree that small-town mayors often aren't notable (sorry Dad). Dipics 20:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• comment emeryville is not a small down, its population is actually closer to 15,000 right now, its had a ginormous boom in development and high rises, its not rural its urban, its right in the middle of the urban core of the san francisco bay, surrounded by oakland. there are way less important people that have articles, this is legitimate and frankly i believe that she qualifies as notable un wp guidelinesQrc2006 23:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • See my comment above - Town notable, mayor not. exolon 01:29, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment The fact that there may be less notable people with articles is never a legitimate argument. If you find any, please feel free to nominate them for AFD. A mayor that only gets about 500 ghits doesn't strike me as notable. Dipics 23:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. One reason the mayor is notable is that she represents a few firsts in the history of municipal government in her community. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 05:07, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to Emeryville, California. -AED 06:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep or merge mayors. Kappa 07:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment This person just does not pass WP:BIO. She is not a "Political figure holding international, national or statewide/provincewide office or members of a national, state or provincial legislature." Nor is she a "Major local political figure who receive (or received) significant press coverage" (she has received next to none). Ask yourself, if she was not the CURRENT mayor, would anyone have tried to list her? My bet, only if they were a friend or relative. I see no former mayors of this town listed on Wikipedia. Hence she easily fails the 100 year test also. Dipics 11:59, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I'm not sure why people refuse to acknowledge that WP:BIO is a guideline that represents a consensus. This person clearly does not meet the criteria. While there are indeed 500 ghits, it's only 148 unique hits, many of which are lists of mayors, lists of homosexual mayors or list of people involved in this or that project/charity/group neither of which constitute non-trivial independent media coverage. Ruth Atkin looks like a fine individual no doubt but the failure to meet WP:BIO is pretty clear and there is nothing suggesting that the guideline should not be applied in this case. Pascal.Tesson 14:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom and above. Town too small for its mayor to be encyclopedically notable. Bwithh 15:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to Emeryville, California as per user:AED. -- Aiditor 15:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom--Peta 05:29, 12 September 2006 (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.