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 keep. Nakon 21:35, 28 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Lorenzo W. Elder (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Elder's highest claim to notability is having served as mayor of Hoboken, New Jersey. Hoboken is neither large enough nor regionally significant enough for such a position to confirm notability. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 18:36, 13 February 2015 (UTC) reply

• Keep the article meets the general notability guideline. The population size has nothing to do with notability. The biographical entry in an encyclopedia and two obituaries in journals, determine notability. -- Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) ( talk) 19:25, 13 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:14, 13 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:14, 13 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 22:14, 13 February 2015 (UTC) reply

• Redirect to ... (drumroll) Mayor of Hoboken, New Jersey. I don't see any particularly notable accomplishment in his one-paragraph entry in The Physicians and Surgeons of the United States (last reference in the article). He gets mentioned as "a well-known physician of Hoboken, of most excellent repute" in a lawsuit over a will, [1] but that hardly helps. Clarityfiend ( talk) 03:47, 14 February 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep Sources adequate for one who died in 1892. Notable as local politician. Billy Hathorn ( talk) 17:33, 14 February 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep As a major local political leader, with ample coverage in reliable and verifiable sources to establish notability. Despite its size, Hoboken punches far above its weight, drawing a disproportionate level of coverage from New York City and New Jersey newspapers, as evidenced here and in the article for the present mayor, Dawn Zimmer. The nominator appears to have prejudged this AfD based on the city's size and has made no mention or taken any consideration of the availability of reliable and verifiable sources or of alternative solutions as explicitly required by WP:BEFORE. The additional failure to combine a series of such AfDs all based on the same rationalization raises further issues. Alansohn ( talk) 00:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC) reply
• Delete and redirect to Mayor of Hoboken, New Jersey. He does not meet notability as a physician by extension from wp:prof. As a politician, he seems to be lacking independent coverage of his political importance (as required by wp:NPOL #3 for local politicians) as shown by the fact that the only verifiable references to him are from journals for physicians, which tend to inflate the importance of physicians. As @ user:alansohn argues, hoboken punches above its weight in importance to NYC and new jersey press, so if the subject were important as a politician there should be more mention of him in that roll. BakerStMD  T| C 17:15, 15 February 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep. Satisfies GNG. I think that being a mayor and brigade surgeon, and being responsible for the establishment of a county health board, and so forth, is sufficient for a person who died in 1892. I suspect that BIO was written with BLPs in mind, so I doubt its relevance. Physicians are not academics, so I don't see PROF as relevant. I think that a journal for physicians is a perfectly satisfactory source, and in any event, not all of the sources are such journals, as, for example, one seems to be a biographical dictionary, and another a history book. (Both available to read in Archive.org, so they are verifiable). James500 ( talk) 01:37, 16 February 2015 (UTC) reply
  • Comment While user:James500 is right that physicians are not always academics, we don't have a policy on the notability of physicians because physicians are generally not notable unless they are academics or hold some other notable roll. In the case of the subject of this AFD, he might be notable for his military roll (as a brigade surgeon) rather than as an academic, but wp:SOLDIER makes it clear that he does not rise to that standard either. BakerStMD  T| C 15:36, 17 February 2015 (UTC) reply

• Actually, the principle thrust of my argument (apart from GNG) is that these SNG are obviously innappropriate for historical figures. If we were to go back to the time of the Roman Empire, for example, even a slave would likely be notable if we had substantial information about him, due to the relative paucity of information from that period. Historical importance increases with time. It is not just a question of setting a single bar for politicians etc of all periods. They can't be judged by the same standards. James500 ( talk) 18:24, 17 February 2015 (UTC) reply

@ user:James500, thats a fair point. Is there a set of guidelines for addressing this issue? I'm sure some wise users have explored this before us. I would agree that a physician in the Roman Empire would be notable if we had enough information about him or her, but the same probably is not true for a physician practicing during the Bush administration. BakerStMD  T| C 14:10, 18 February 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete. Mayor of a city of 50,000 people. Just not notable enough. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 15:32, 17 February 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep per WP:BASIC. Whether or not mayors of Hoboken are inherently notable as mayors of regionally significant cities, Elder has been the subject of significant coverage such as [2] and [3]. 24.151.10.165 ( talk) 17:04, 19 February 2015 (UTC) reply

• Keep The nomination's argument is classic WP:NOTBIGENOUGH but "Notability isn't determined by something's quantity of members, but rather by the quality of the subject's verifiable, reliable sources." We have a guy currently at RfA who has been working for years on a place with a pop of just over 300 and most everyone seems to think that's wonderful. Andrew D. ( talk) 09:05, 21 February 2015 (UTC) reply

• Rebuttal. Apples, meet oranges. Clarityfiend ( talk) 14:03, 22 February 2015 (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.