Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Kabat

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. Michig (talk) 06:50, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Kabat

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

This article doesn't meet wp:politician and doesn't meet the broader wp:anybio requirements (just the city's web site and the local newspaper as references). Dolotta (talk) 00:39, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try and add some stuff. the former mayor Mathias Harter has a wiki page I think we just have to make Tim Kabat's better - Wikideas1 (talk) 00:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing it out. Now also nominated for deletion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:25, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I was able to find a few articles via google search and google news that seemed notable. Couple that with the comment above - I went ahead and added some sources and info. I think expansion first, then revisit the
WP:GNG question. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 03:40, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete Even with the references above, everything is routine local coverage of a small city mayor and not sufficient to establish notability. MB 04:22, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Yet another NN small-town mayor. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:19, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A well-sourced and substantive article about a mayor could potentially be kept regardless of the city's size, but
WP:NPOL does not confer an automatic presumption of notability on all mayors. A city would have to be twice the size of La Crosse before his mere existence as a mayor was a compelling enough claim of notability in and of itself to get the "keep and flag for refimprove" treatment rather than the "delete" treatment. Bearcat (talk) 18:01, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete non-notable mayor.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:51, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as not at all convincing for WP:POLITICIAN. SwisterTwister talk 22:26, 9 October 2016 (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.