Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerald Vernon-Jackson (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 keep. CBE recipient; therefore, meets ANYBIO.

(non-admin closure) Strikerforce^Talk 16:27, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Gerald Vernon-Jackson

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

routine election coverage, one is a glancing namecheck of his existence in an article about the death of his mother, and only one source is about him in any non-trivial way. But there's not a city councillor on the planet who couldn't show one reliable source, so that isn't enough sourcing all by itself to make a city councillor notable. Bearcat (talk) 16:57, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:46, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:46, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Recipient of the CBE, which we have always held to be notable under
WP:ANYBIO #1. Also not just any councillor, but leader of the council of a major city. As Portsmouth has the cabinet system, that means his post is essentially an executive position. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Being leader of the council is no notability freebie in and of itself, and "major city" has nothing to do with the notability criteria for city councillors. A city councillor must serve in an internationally famous global city, such as New York City, Toronto or London, to get an automatic inclusion freebie just for existing — outside of that range, a city councillor (even the leader of the council) qualifies for inclusion only if he or she can be referenced to nationalizing coverage that marks him or her out as a special case of significantly greater notability than most other city councillors. There is no loophole in there for council leaders in non-global but still subjectively "major" cities — it's either "global city" or "sourced well enough to be special", and there are no grey areas anywhere in between those two things. Bearcat (talk) 16:47, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, maybe you'd like to explain why we have so many articles on mayors of American cities much smaller than Portsmouth that get kept at AfD? That seems to me to be a precedent for the executive heads of cities of this size to be kept. But be that as it may, his CBE still qualifies him for an article. And there is massive precedent for that. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:45, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I apologise that it's taken me so long to respond here, but as Leader of the Council of a major city and the recipient of a CBE (as Necrothesp notes above me), he fulfils the needed criteria to be 'notable'. Issues with citing and referencing are my fault, which I do apologise for. BitterGiant (talk) 17:15, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.