Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jilly Gibson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:50, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jilly Gibson[edit]

Jilly Gibson (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 subject does not seem to satisfy WP:BIO. Current mayors of surrounding Sydney councils do not have wiki entries. Final reference is broken, remaining 2 references from a single source. Link to web site is broken. Content too brief, only two sentences. Mayoral incumbency info is already available at North Sydney Council. Teraplane (talk) 07:14, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Teraplane (talk) 07:14, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Teraplane (talk) 07:14, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The mayors of local government areas in Australia (which are not the city government itself, but what North American or British readers would understand as borough councillors below the level of the main citywide government) are not handed an automatic free pass over WP:NPOL #2 just for existing as mayors, but this is not referenced anywhere near well enough to actually pass the "subject of significant press coverage" test. That bar is not cleared by every mayor or councillor in the world who can show two local press hits, because every local mayor or councillor in the world can always show two press hits — at this level of prominence, the notability test is the ability to show a volume and depth and range of press coverage that expands to the point that she would have a credible claim to being a special case of significantly greater notability than most other mayors of local government areas. Bearcat (talk) 13:54, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete an LGA is the third tier of Government in Australia, we have Federal Government(National), State Governments(NSW, QLD, WA, etc), the next tier is Local Governments of which this person is a mayor. Note that some of these local government areas can cover land areas bigger than many countries. A list article all mayors from an LGA is ok, but an alternative primary reason for notability is generally needed for LGA Mayors, being mayor would only lift a one other event person to notability. Gnangarra 18:41, 11 June 2019 (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.