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 WP:SNOW delete. BD2412 T 02:08, 2 December 2019 (UTC) reply

James Foord (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Biography of a person whose only stated notability claim is as town clerk and registrar of deeds at the county level, which are not inherently notable political offices. People are not automatically notable just because they happen to be glancingly namechecked a couple of times in local-interest sources; at this level of significance, he would have to show nationalized coverage to clear the notability bar. Bearcat ( talk) 03:14, 25 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat ( talk) 03:14, 25 November 2019 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Very important to note that this AFD is related to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enos Foord. ミラ P 04:05, 25 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. ミラ P 04:06, 25 November 2019 (UTC) reply

• Delete. The office holds no notability; it doesn't have a WP article of its own (and for good reason). The sources are here are just mentions, and extremely local. -- Kbabej ( talk) 04:24, 25 November 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Non notable office to pass WP:NPOL nor the sourcing is good enough to pass WP:GNG. CASSIOPEIA^{( talk)} 10:24, 25 November 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete: per above and my comments on the Enos Foord AfD. Also note that the article creator has made, in recent weeks, a great number of similarly marginal articles with similarly threadbare citations. [1] Ravenswing 11:41, 25 November 2019 (UTC) reply
• Deletel I shudder to think what Wikipedia would be like if we allowed articles reflecting such hyper localism to survive. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 19:31, 25 November 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete, per WP:SNOW, contra Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eliphalet Pond, Jr.. Before 1800, the federal and state governments were minuscule compared to what they would become later, so local governments had out-sized influence in Americans' lives. Fewer than 100,000 white men voted in the 1800 United States presidential election. State and local governments were practically independent, according to the Report of 1800. After the War of 1812, and going into the Era of Good Feelings, the United States government grew exponentially. States also grew larger and started to enforce the idea of separation of powers into their state and local governments at the time. In the 1828 election 1,148,018 white men voted, 10 times the number who'd voted 28 years prior, a reflection of overall growth in population, immigration and naturalization, the expanding suffrage to White working class men, the Louisiana Purchase, and the greater number and importance of Federal officials. So this article is about a person whose term in office overlapped with this rapidly changing period of American History. I'd delete this one, but keep the ones of those who served their careers in local government earlier. Bearian ( talk) 17:02, 27 November 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.