Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michele Megale

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. Daniel (talk) 23:47, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Michele Megale

[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)

Local politician of small town who's death made the papers. Fails WP:NPOL. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:15, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Meets GNG. GNG doesn’t distinguish between worldwide or local sources. As long it sources are secondary, independent and reliable. Note he didn’t only had coverage after his death; the Italian article was already created in 2010. SportsOlympic (talk) 01:50, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 02:13, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 02:13, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Firstly, WP:GNG is not just an indiscriminate "keep anybody who has n>2 media hits regardless of any other considerations" — GNG most certainly does test sources for their depth, their geographic range and the context of what they're covering the person for, and not just for whether the raw number of hits has exceeded two. We certainly don't have a rule that "local" coverage is inadmissible for use as Wikipedia sourcing, but we do have a rule that a small smattering of "local" coverage is not necessarily always enough in and of itself. For example, every mayor of everywhere can always show two or three hits in their local media — but our rule is that mayors are not all inherently notable just for existing as mayors, so the distinction between a notable mayor and a non-notable mayor does not turn on just showing a smattering of local media hits, it turns on being able to show a lot of coverage demonstrating a reason to treat him as significantly more important and notable than most other mayors. But that's just not being shown here at all.
And secondly, the fact that the Italian article has existed for a decade isn't determinative: for almost its entire lifespan, it was based entirely on primary sources that aren't support for notability, with no reliable or notability-building sources added at all until the blip of death coverage hit in June. So it shouldn't have existed since 2010, because it never had a properly sourced reason to exist either. Also see WP:WAX for further clarification of why "this is a straight translation of an article that already exists on another language Wikipedia" is not a compelling keep argument in and of itself. Bearcat (talk) 15:13, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, articles and sources with an overly local scope aren't considered significant. Geschichte (talk) 21:03, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Bearcat. Mccapra (talk) 04:08, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Mayor of Trapani - As Bearcat mentions, the community expects that there is substantive coverage of the policies and actions of a local elected official. Usually, the expectation is that the coverage is contemporary, adds context to decisions or actions, and ideally not composed solely of local sourcing. --Enos733 (talk) 17:26, 16 August 2021 (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.