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. I looked at the article and both sides of the discussion, and I feel that in its current state, the article has met the notability and verifiability thresholds. - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 05:14, 28 July 2015 (UTC) reply

P. Elmo Futrell, Jr. (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Mayor of a town of less than 15,000 people. IMHO there is nothing here that fufills WP:POLITICIAN criteria. Article is also largely based on obituaries and Find a Grave which both fail WP:RS. ...William 18:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC) reply

• This is very serious, we need to get the Baton Rouge Morning Advocate blacklisted as unreliable as quickly as possible. We should immediately delete the several hundred references used in Wikipedia from the Baton Rouge Morning Advocate. We may have to delete those articles too. -- Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) ( talk) 04:23, 22 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:58, 5 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 21:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC) reply

• delete at first I thought the article sounded plausable, but without additional outside secondary sources discussing impact (could be newspaper coverage of the election, for example), it doesn't meet GNG... too many of the sources don't meet RS and are used to highlight material broader than basic factual information. Sadads ( talk) 18:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep. Subject was Louisiana Mayor of the Year in 1964. Qualifies under "local politician". Other sources are off-line, as he left office in the spring of 1966. Billy Hathorn ( talk) 20:29, 6 July 2015 (UTC) reply

The "local politician" criterion requires that you show significantly more press coverage than has been offered here, and winning a "mayor of the year" award isn't a criterion that gets a mayor over WP:NPOL in and of itself. Bearcat ( talk) 17:47, 8 July 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete. Of the seven sources here, two of them are covering him specifically in the context of his death rather than any actual career coverage, two are obituaries of his son and wife (thus entirely failing to constitute any sort of coverage of him), two are on completely invalid user-generated content sites that cannot support his notability, and the only one that counts for anything toward getting him past WP:GNG just namechecks his existence rather than being about him. Even the mayor of a city ten or 100 times this size would not be entitled to keep a Wikipedia article based on that piss-poor quality of sourcing — and winning a "mayor of the year" award confers no kind of notability freebie whatsoever on a person who can't be sourced better than this either. Delete. Bearcat ( talk) 17:47, 8 July 2015 (UTC) reply
• New info found on term as mayor. I will look for more; most would be off-line, as he left office 49 years ago. Billy Hathorn ( talk) 02:53, 12 July 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete falls far short of notability guidelines. Mayor of the year for a state no more makes a person notable than being teacher of the year for a state. If it did my 5th grade teacher would have an article in Wikipedia. Also at the time Futrell was mayor the city had less than 10,000 residents. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 17:05, 13 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Comment In the comments for deletion of Jerry D. Roe, you wrote: Keep That Michiganian of the year award seems enough. John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:29, 17 July 2015 (UTC); so why is Michiganian of the Year" notable but not a statewide "Mayor of the Year" in Louisiana? Billy Hathorn ( talk) 04:14, 19 July 2015 (UTC) reply

• Keep The press coverage seems sufficient to meet the requirement for a mayor. -- Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) ( talk) 04:52, 14 July 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep He was the mayor in the 60s, so you're not going to find many sources online. Ever heard of this? Rainbow unicorn ( talk) 18:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Nobody in this discussion said that the sources had to be online, or that newspaper sourcing was unacceptable. I use non-web print-only sourcing all the time. But newspaper sourcing still has to be cited in the article — it is not enough to merely assert that newspaper coverage might exist, if you don't actually show your work. Bearcat ( talk) 18:23, 20 July 2015 (UTC) reply

• Comment. There are eight newspaper sources and a total of fifteen sources for one who left office in 1966. This is more sourcing than many articles have. The article Thomas "Tommy" Nelson, former mayor of New Roads (population under 5,000) has one source about Nelson's indictment, presumably awaiting expansion by someone. The article does not even have the years Nelson was mayor. There is nothing in the rules about population of cities and mayors though some keep referring to this. Billy Hathorn ( talk) 18:57, 20 July 2015 (UTC) reply
• Delete: Sketchy sourcing and failing GNG with stretches per Sadads. The Dissident Aggressor 13:39, 21 July 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep Ample reliable and verifiable sources regarding a political figure who left office almost 50 years ago. The level of detail and sourcing provided by User:Billy Hathorn goes well beyond the minimums of the notability standard. Alansohn ( talk) 17:49, 21 July 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep per WP:HEY. Good job, Billy_Hathorn. Bearian ( talk) 22:54, 22 July 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep as subject crosses the verifiability and notability thresholds. Notability is not a competition. - Dravecky ( talk) 13:56, 23 July 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep I'm seeing the WP:BASIC met, and the ideas presented in WP:HEY also apply. -- j⚛e decker ^talk 22:09, 27 July 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.