Misplaced Pages

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Nyttend (talk | contribs) at 00:30, 3 June 2020 (Speedy kept). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

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 speedy keep, and sanctions for disruption will be imposed if you make more nominations that are so grossly erroneous. Nyttend (talk) 00:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Lee Myxter

New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Lee Myxter (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)

Micro stub which does not appear to reach the WP:NPOL requirement for Significant coverage. References at this time consist of Legislature directory page, An "independent" directory page, and a trivial mention in a list of many election returns. This was page was created by an editor who is currently subject to editing restrictions regarding creation of pages. Hasteur (talk) 17:24, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Hasteur (talk) 17:24, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Hasteur (talk) 17:24, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Dakota-related deletion discussions. Hasteur (talk) 17:24, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep: this is ridiculous. You cite NPOL, but have you actually read it? Lee Myxter held a "state/province–wide office" as proven by a government website. That means he's clearly notable. TryKid  17:38, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
  • WP:NPOL is a guideline, not a rule. Per the top of the section that includes NPOL: meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included. --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE) 17:59, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
• Keep per my stated rationale. It is also irrelevant that the article creator is under a restriction, since it is that very restriction which forces them through the AfC process; still, since WP:BMB does not apply, an editor's restrictions are a distraction at best. ——Serial 17:42, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
• Keep clearly meets NPOL. I will emphasize that NPOL is not just any old SNG. I point to footnote 12 linked from there, which reads "this criterion ensures that our coverage of major political offices, incorporating all of the present and past holders of that office, will be complete regardless." So, this goes above and beyond just "a claim to notability that hints at a strong possibility that GNG can be met with a deep enough dig". Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:02, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
• Snow Keep per TryKid, not really sure any way that one can swing delete here. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 18:08, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
• Keep Seems to pass WP:POLITICIAN easily as he has been a member of a legislative body. Theroadislong (talk) 18:12, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
• Keep. State legislators have a straight pass of WP:NPOL #1. The current quality of the article is not relevant to their keepability at all — state legislators always have media coverage, and we're just not always on the ball about actually finding and using all of it, which is not the same thing as coverage not existing in the first place. And since the creator used the AFC process, and the article was approved by an AFC reviewer who isn't under any similar restrictions, the original creator's restriction on creating articles is not a problem either since external oversight was involved. And yes, when it comes to state legislators our goal is to be as complete as feasibly possible a reference for all of them, not to pick and choose that some are more notable than others for some arbitrary reason outside of their having being covered by the media in the context of holding a notable political office — so precisely because better sourcing does exist to repair an inadequate article about a state legislator with, articles about state legislators are not deleted just for not already being in better shape than they are. Plus the AFC reviewer has personally already done some work on improving the sourcing here, so this article is already in better shape than it was at the time of nomination. Bearcat (talk) 21:35, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
• Keep Straight pass of WP:NPOL. The goal is to have biographies of all federal and statewide elected officials. Whether or not the current state of an article is a stub, there will be sources available to improve the article. --Enos733 (talk) 22:10, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

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.