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. article appears to meet notability requirements (non-admin closure) — Music1201 talk 18:25, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

County executives of Atlantic County, New Jersey[edit]

County executives of Atlantic County, New Jersey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The page was created to circumvent the likely outcome of a deletion discussion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dennis Levinson. The article serves no other purpose. The History section just duplicates information already found at Atlantic County, New Jersey#Government and politics. Then you have biographies of three people. The first one Charles D. Worthington actually passes WP:POLITICIAN as a member of the state general assembly and already has his own article (so we're just duplicating information). The second "Richard Squires" was freeholder for 20 years, but can only be sourced to a few local newspaper articles. And the third Dennis Levinson is already being discussed at his own deletion discussion. Combining several non-notable topics into one article does not make it notable. The article is mostly about election results anyway. It's amazing in over 40 years of combined service these three men have accomplished almost nothing of note. Maybe county executive just isn't that important of a position? Rusf10 (talk) 21:40, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:29, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:29, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please address the scope of the article? ThanksDjflem (talk) 20:40, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I thought I did. The original part of the article contains information about the governance part of the county, which provides a background to the list: but the problem is, the list itself isn't notable. I can't find any secondary sources showing a history of county executives in Atlantic County, and most importantly, none of the members of the list are notable on their own. This article is a creative way to merge several non-notable articles together to make them notable, but the topic itself isn't notable - there are no reliable, independent secondary sources I can find on county executives. SportingFlyer (talk) 05:35, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I need to get better at citing policy; this article's a clear WP:BLP evasion attempt. SportingFlyer (talk) 19:11, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'll change my vote if you can find a reliable, independent, secondary source. Right now we have:
  • an article about the type of government New Jersey has, which is fine, but is outside the scope of the list
  • a New York Times opinion piece which because of the way it's presented is basically a primary source
  • a primary source on the history of county government
  • a decent secondary source on New Jersey Politics and Government, which is a good source, but it's not about any of the people who were county executives
  • a court case, probably a decent source but has the same problem as the book
  • another primary source
  • three other primary sources and several newspaper articles, all about the election of these people to the office.

Find me a source showing the notability of this particular county government and I'll change my vote. I also note this type of information is not normally found on Wikipedia, but I don't want to make a WP:OSE argument. Also want to note the one person on the list with an article passed WP:POLITICIAN for being a general assembly member. SportingFlyer (talk) 05:46, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If that source can be found it should not only be a reliable, independent, secondary source, but with in-depth coverage. I'm sure there's some article with a mention of one of these people attending an event or being quoted about something, but it needs to be in-depth coverage.--Rusf10 (talk) 05:58, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Djflem:- Please lay off the WP:PERSONALATTACKs--Rusf10 (talk) 16:43, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry to say, it's not about you. The nomination contains:
conjecture: "The page was created to circumvent the likely outcome of a deletion discussion."
tunnel vision: "The article serves no other purpose." citing WP:POLITICIAN does not address scope of the newly-created article.
irrelevant musings: "It's amazing in over 40 years of combined service these three men have accomplished almost nothing of note. Maybe county executive just isn't that important of a position."
Yes, that is about me. And all of those statements backup my claim why this article should not exist. 1. The person who created this article clearly did so in direct response to the other deletion discussion (he even says so above), so don't call it a conjecture. 2. The two of the three subjects in this article do not independently pass WP:POLITICIAN. The third already has his own page, so including information here is redundant. If the subjects fail notability standards independently, they do not all of sudden pass when combined. 3. That statement makes the larger point that the position itself is barely covered by reliable sources, outside of election results.--Rusf10 (talk) 22:07, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Rusf10, this article was created to add an encylopedic topic to Wikipedia that addresses your concerns about another article. The creation of this article involved researching the subject, finding sources -- some tough to find due to the gap in access to sources from the 1970s -- and writing an article about the topic in a manner that would provide readers with an encyclopedic overview of the topic.(Personal attack removed)Alansohn (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Rusf10, this article was created to add an encylopedic topic to Wikipedia that addresses your concerns about another article. The creation of this article involved researching the subject, finding sources -- some tough to find due to the gap in access to sources from the 1970s -- and writing an article about the topic in a manner that would provide readers with an encyclopedic overview of the topic.
Please remember that this AfD is one mere part of a s-storm of deletions started three months ago because you didn't like my vote at an AfD, responding "I think what is making you upset here is a conflict of interest WP:COI. I have now noticed that both you and the subject of the article live in the same town. And to be honest with you, the article List of people from Teaneck, New Jersey should not exist and neither should about half the articles on that list. Believe it or not, every mayor of Teaneck does not qualify for an article." (see here). There is something truly f-ed up about about an editor trying to trace me back to create a WP:COI connection to an article for a person I had little to no idea existed beyond having a Wikipedia article. In the months since, out of pure spite, this started with a blizzard of AfDs of articles about people from Teaneck and, since that first effort was largely unsuccessful, you are stalking me to articles I've created, such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dennis Levinson and a half dozen articles bundled into Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doreen McAndrew DiDomenico, and now this one. There is something even more fundamentally f-ed up with an editor who devotes 99% of their time on Wikipedia to destroying encyclopedic content all as an act of revenge for a vote at an obscure AfD about Bill Zanker, an article I never gave a s-t about other than it was about an individual who I thought was notable. Alansohn (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're joking, right? 250,000 is smaller than the population of my town. In England. That is a tiny number. Guy (Help!) 13:46, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is about the three people. This is in fact a composite WP:BLP article. It is not simply an article about the office that contains a list of people who have held it. The article contains extensive biographical information about three people so it should be treated as a biography. There is almost nothing to write about the actual office (or at least nothing that wasn't contained in the Atlantic County article before). You are also making an WP:OSE argument by finding similiar articles, which is usually not a good one to make. However, those articles are not exactly the same, if you want to compare this article to the others you listed, you will see that not a single one of them contains biographical information.--Rusf10 (talk) 23:43, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the article doesn't have to be about three people. More information can be found and added about the position, this AfD was made before the page was even 3 hours old, I say let's be patient. The way I read this page it's about the position, not the individuals who hold it. It absolutely is about the office of county executive, with incidental biographical information about the people who have held that office in the past. Their inclusion in this article is not necessary for it to meet notability, and many other pages only included this type of information in list form. Apologies if my wording came across contrary to WP:OSE, it was more so to show how this article is actually better than those which only include a list.. I like list articles to have more biographical information in them. It's more encyclopedic.
At the end of the day the AfD should question if "County Executive of Atlantic City" meets GNG. I say it does. Again, I don't care if the individuals who have held that position meet GNG on their own because that's not what the AfD is about. You said it's not simply an article about the office, I'm saying from my perspective it is. On those merits alone it warrants inclusion on this site. That's my take on it. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 00:42, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting how the nominator claims this is a composite WP:BLP article. It has been claimed that election coverage does not count or qualify individuals under Wikipedia:NPOL. Yet here - when most of the coverage about the individuals who have held the political office is in direct reference to the actual election to the political office- it becomes an "illegitimate" biography. How does that work, that in some places election coverage of a person doesn't make it valid biographical coverage about a person, but here, a rationale for claiming it is a biography. Seems a little odd, no?Djflem (talk) 10:51, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless, at this point the page has been edited to sufficiently toss the problems brought up by this AfD out the window. I don't think it was before the edits, but surely at this point it's not an article to circumvent the BLP policy. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 15:52, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is still a composite biography, nothing has changed. The people's names were just replaced with the years they served. When you still have content like "Raised in Ventnor City, Levinson graduated from Atlantic City High School, before earning a bachelor's degree at Glassboro...", that's a biography. The three subjects do not pass WP:NPOL separately because there is virtually no coverage of them outside election results. They do not pass when combined either, you can change the title of the article and subheadings as much as you want to try to disguise it, but it is still a WP:BLP.--Rusf10 (talk) 18:20, 4 March 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.
Category