Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phil Washington

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. Nomination Withdrawn. Coverage around his new role as the FAA administrator makes for a clear definition of being notable.

(non-admin closure) scope_creep^Talk 09:20, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Phil Washington

[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)

Fails

WP:BIO. Routine coverage, e.g. appointement notices, none of it secondary. scope_creep^Talk 14:04, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:32, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Washington was appointed to the president's transition team ([1],[2],[3]. He was CEO of the
WP:GNG. Jacona (talk) 00:09, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

You have a blog reference here, a confirmation of being tapped by Biden, a notice of employement, a confirmation of employment. All of it, low-quality dross, absolute low-quality junk references. The confirmation is slightly better quality but it another routine notice. None of it is secondary. scope_creep^Talk 11:03, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This multi-page article in the LA Times [5] is not "low-quality dross, absolute low-quality junk". It is in-depth significant coverage. Jacona (talk) 11:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is routine annoucement of employment and the majority of the article isn't about it. That is a perenial problem with articles of this type; folk at folk present these notices as though they are genuine secondary sources when they are not and there is rough consensus around that fact, that they are not. They are routine coverage. They're not exactly primary but they not secondary either. What they are is standard notice no analysis. scope_creep^Talk 12:46, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:31, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:36, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There are countless articles that are published by LA Times, Denver Business Journal, Local CBS stations, and other sources. I feel that this article should be expanded, but there are plenty of quality secondary sources to expand this article. As mentioned above, adding a section about his inclusion on Biden's transition team, his involvement and plans for expanding public transportation before the 2028 Olympics in LA. There is room for improvement, not deletion.
talk) 16:51, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
https://denver.cbslocal.com/2021/10/22/phil-washington-ceo-denver-international-airport-long-lines-parking-shortages/

https://www.denverpost.com/2021/06/30/denver-airport-phil-washington-new-ceo/

https://www.denverpost.com/2021/06/15/denver-international-airport-phil-washington-investigation-l-a-metro/

talk) 16:54, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

this Jacona (talk) 22:55, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yip. @Jacona: I think it is now a super-heavyweight keep. Being brought back into the fray a second time, i.e. given the nod, is a clear indication is being notable. Nomination Withdrawn scope_creep^Talk 09:19, 10 June 2022 (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.