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. The only argument to keep was an appeal to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Redirecting to Lakewood Township, New Jersey#Local government seems like a reasonable plan, but there was no discussion of that, so I'm not going to implement it. If anybody wants to create the redirect on their own editorial initiative, there's nothing in this AfD that prevents them from doing so. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:35, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply

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

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

Local politician in a township in which the mayor is selected by the members of the council, not directly elected by the voters. Nothing in this article or available in a Google search would support a claim of notability. Alansohn ( talk) 02:01, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:49, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:49, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete: as non-notable actor. Quis separabit? 08:27, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Where does the article say anything about him being an actor? Bearcat ( talk) 17:18, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

There is an actor Ray Cole ( http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0170742/), but article is not about him. Djflem ( talk) 17:35, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 11:25, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete. The township has a much larger population than I expect something called "township" to have, meaning he probably would clear WP:NPOL #2 if he could be well-sourced enough to pass the "who have received significant press coverage" condition — but the automatic presumption of notability for mayors only applies to a directly-elected executive mayor rather than the kind who's selected internally among the municipal councillors. Which means that to actually qualify for an article, he would have to be shown to pass WP:GNG — but of the four sources shown here, two are primary sources, one is a WordPress blog, and the one that's actually a legitimately reliable source isn't about Coles, but just namechecks his existence in an article about the township's population growth. This is not the kind of sourcing that it takes to get a mayor into Wikipedia. Bearcat ( talk) 17:18, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

WP:NPOL #2 isn't very clear, but doesn't seem to say automatic presumption of notability for mayors only applies to a directly-elected executive mayor rather than the kind who's selected internally among the municipal councillors.

Firstly, NPOL #2 doesn't have to say that for it to still be true. What actually happens at AFD, when mayors actually come up for discussion, remains true regardless of whether it's been formally codified into policy yet or not — and established AFD consensus most certainly does limit the presumption of notability to directly elected executive mayors. There are, for example, places in both England and the United States which are significantly larger than Lakewood, where the mayors have been deleted because the place was governed under a weak-mayor or appointed-mayor system rather than a directly-elected-mayor system and thus the depth of media coverage required to get the mayor past WP:GNG simply wasn't there.

Secondly, kindly note that what NPOL #2 does say — "who have received significant press coverage" — hasn't been satisfied here either. That's the bottom line for whether a mayor gets an article: regardless of variables like city size or system of election or appointment, the determining factor for whether they get an article for it or not is ultimately tied to whether or not the article can be reliably sourced to a WP:GNG-fulfilling depth and breadth of media coverage. Bearcat ( talk) 18:58, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

I referred to NPOL #2 because is was mentioned above, but if doesn't have to say that for it to still be true, why cite it? That's bit confusing and sounds like an interpretation. If indeed AFD consensus about a mayor being from the place governed under a weak-mayor or appointed-mayor system rather than a directly-elected-mayor system has been established that should be easy find. (Suggestions where to look?) Of course that makes the 100,000+ city mayors template somewhat useless, doesn't t? Djflem ( talk) 20:40, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

And I referred to NPOL #2 in the context of the article's lack of press coverage to demonstrate a pass of the "who have received significant press coverage" condition, not in the context of the city size issue that you tried to connect it to. So that's "why cite it": because I cited it in the context of what it says, not in the context of what it doesn't.

Just to clarify in case it's unclear: the condition that every mayor always has to meet to be eligible for an article is "who have received significant press coverage". If enough coverage is shown to get the mayor over WP:GNG, then it doesn't actually matter whether the place is a major metropolitan city or a village of 10, or whether the council structure is strong-mayor or weak-mayor — the population size and strength-of-the-mayoralty tests come into play when we have to determine how much benefit of the doubt to grant to an article that isn't adequately referenced, as in this case. The size of the city and how much executive power the mayor does or doesn't have are irrelevant if the article is well-sourced and substantive — but they are controlling on the question of whether a poorly sourced article gets the "keep and flag for refimprove" treatment or the "delete without prejudice against future recreation if somebody can do better" treatment. Bearcat ( talk) 12:36, 5 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Keep If one looks at the below template, one sees that Wikipedia does encourage articles about mayors of New Jersey cities with 100,000+population as well as other states. If one clicks on other states one finds that all mayors of cities with 100,000+populations are listed, some in red, which the presumption that an article will be written. One will also note that some ( Bill Bencini, Bill Saffo, Larry Wolgast, George Cretekos, Andre Quintero, Steve Callaway, Domenic Sarno, for example) in those states are stubs waiting for expansion, similar to this article.

Djflem ( talk) 17:28, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Firstly, we only grant an automatic presumption of notability to directly-elected mayors, not to the kind who are selected internally by the council members themselves. And secondly, please familiarize yourself with WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS — while Wikipedia used to simply accept mayors as automatically notable if the city had attained a certain specific population and effectively ignore the matter of whether or not the article actually cited enough reliable source coverage to properly clear WP:GNG, consensus can and does change. The inclusion requirement for mayors now is much more strongly tied to whether the sourcing is up to scratch or not — a place's population does not confer a free exemption from the mayors' articles having to be sourced better than this anymore, and any other mayor whose article is sourced this badly is now a deletion candidate too. Bearcat ( talk) 18:51, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Comment In previous discussions, the community has distinguished between directly-elected mayors and those selected as mayor internally by the council members themselves. In a Council–manager government, an appointed city manager performs the executive functions of the jurisdiction, while the mayor presides over the council meeting, may be the official spokesperson for the jurisdiction (but remains an equal member of the council), and the title is primarily ceremonial. Both the method of election and powers of the office, I think, are significant in presuming the notability of the individual. Individuals campaigning for the position of mayor of large cities do receive more third-party coverage of their campaigns (than candidates for council). In addition, the actions of the mayor (including presentation of the budget, oversight of the police, and veto power of legislation) provide additional opportunities for independent news coverage. -- Enos733 ( talk) 19:39, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2017 June 12. — ^{cyberbot I} _{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:42, 12 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete does not have sufficient coverage in RS to meet the GNG, WP:NPOL not withstanding. Dlohcierekim ( talk) 10:49, 20 June 2017 (UTC) reply
• Merge/redirect to Lakewood Township, New Jersey#Local government per WP:ATD-R. He might not be notable on his own but there is no reason why the info cannot be added to the town's article and this article redirected there. Regards So Why 12:21, 28 June 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.