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. czar 16:46, 4 July 2017 (UTC) reply

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

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

Vanity page created for non-notable position (US county administrator) Loopy30 ( talk) 01:46, 27 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 08:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 08:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete. Serving as a county supervisor is not an automatic WP:NPOL pass in and of itself. He could still qualify for an article if enough media coverage could be shown to get him over #2 ("major local political figures who have received significant press coverage") — but three pieces of purely local coverage is not enough to do that, because every county supervisor in any county could always show three pieces of local media coverage. At this level of government, what's required is to show that he's significantly more notable than the norm for that level of office — but nothing here, neither in the substance nor in the sourcing, demonstrates that at all. Bearcat ( talk) 17:15, 28 June 2017 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Far below the level of sourcing required to meet NPOL or BLP. No compelling assertion of notability compared to the thousands of other county supervisors nationwide. If I read this information correctly, this fellow wasn't even elected by county voters, but was appointed when a previous officeholder died. BusterD ( talk) 13:09, 4 July 2017 (UTC) reply
• Delete as per nom and above editors. Clearly does not meet either WP:GNG or WP:NPOL. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:19, 4 July 2017 (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.