Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patsy Sloan

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. Nja²⁴⁷ 19:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Patsy Sloan

Fails WP:POLITICIAN. No significant coverage in reliable, third-party sources. لenna vecia 19:11, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 19:30, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The mayor of such a small city probably shouldn't have an article. The lack of coverage in reliable sources furthers that argument. Tim meh ! 21:40, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, the nominator is correct that the standard for mayors is the presence of reliable sources — but the size of the city or town that they lead is irrelevant if the sources are there. She doesn't seem to have much in the way of substantive coverage, so delete — but a mayor of a town with just 10 people still qualifies for an article if legitimate sources pan out, so delete without prejudice (almost typed prejucide!) against recreation if better sources can be added in the future. Bearcat (talk) 22:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless there are sources to indicate significant coverage. Blue Square Thing (talk) 23:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Bearcat. Willking1979 (talk) 16:47, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:03, 25 April 2009 (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.