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 no consensus. Sandstein 19:51, 5 January 2020 (UTC) reply

Roger Millar (engineer) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

State-level department head with no other political experience. There are no other cabinet appointees who have articles, let alone nationally for the heads of DOTs. His name turns up no results for most national news websites, except for a quote in The Washington Post. The local major newspaper, The Seattle Times, only has a few passing mentions of him after his appointment and confirmation. Sounder Bruce 03:58, 15 December 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sounder Bruce 03:58, 15 December 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Sounder Bruce 03:58, 15 December 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Sounder Bruce 03:58, 15 December 2019 (UTC) reply

• @ SounderBruce: What about Hilary Franz? You edited that one. KidAd ( talk) 04:00, 15 December 2019 (UTC) reply

• Franz is an elected official who has had far more regional coverage. An appointee like Millar rarely gets a full profile or interview in a reliable source. Sounder Bruce 04:02, 15 December 2019 (UTC) reply

• While Franz may be elected and Millar appointed, they receive about the same coverage from local sources. (Seattle Times, local TV stations, etc.) Franz hardly has a "national" profile. KidAd ( talk) 04:00, 15 December 2019 (UTC) reply

• Delete, without prejudice against recreation in the future if and when somebody can write and source something much better than this. At the state level, nationalizing coverage is not as essential as it is at the municipal level — it certainly wouldn't hurt if there were some, but at the state level of office there's no inherent requirement for there to be any. What's more determinative here, rather, is that three of the four footnotes are primary sources that are not support for notability at all, with just one piece of real, notability-supporting reliable source media coverage shown at all. This is a role where an article would be fine if you could get him over WP:GNG on the quality and depth of sourcing, not an "inherently" notable role for which he would be entitled to keep an article that has to depend almost entirely on primary sources — but on a Google search, I'm not seeing any real evidence that Millar has equivalent coverage to Hilary Franz: I'm seeing a lot of sources that glancingly namecheck his existence in the context of being about transportation projects in the state, but not a lot of sources that are about him for the purposes of establishing his notability. I will note that his predecessor, Lynn Peterson, does not have an article at all — I've only been able to find one earlier holder of this role who does have an article, Sid Morrison, and he has an article for having been a member of the United States House of Representatives, not for this role per se. This role would be enough if the sourcing were better — but it's not a role where it would be so critically important to keep an article about him that he would be exempted from having to show better sources than this. Bearcat ( talk) 14:37, 15 December 2019 (UTC) reply

Bearcat, the question I have is whether appointed state level cabinet officials are "generally regarded as notable" (see WP:POLOUTCOMES #1) or is the standard you are proposing the "article should say more than just "Jane Doe is the mayor of Cityville"" ( WP:POLOUTCOMES #2). If the former, then the article should be kept (as it is unquestioned that the subject holds a cabinet position in the Washington State government). If the latter, I am finding a bunch of sources about the subject around the time of his appointment (August 2016) (e.g. this Seattle Times article or this article from the Everett Herald). -- Enos733 ( talk) 18:37, 15 December 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 22:20, 16 December 2019 (UTC) reply

• Keep I believe that appointed state level cabinet officials are "generally regarded as notable" (see WP:POLOUTCOMES #1). There is no question the subject serves is the state's Secretary of Transportation (and a member of the State's executive cabinet). I think the amount of sourcing (even as much of it is largely quotes) is sufficient to develop a article that is much more than "he exists." -- Enos733 ( talk) 05:20, 20 December 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep as page creator Keep per WP:POLOUTCOMES #1 and WP:GNG. KidAd ( talk) 05:27, 20 December 2019 (UTC) reply

• Keep, has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. (There is also a plausible argument to be made that it would facilitate properly encyclopedic coverage of state policy issues to have articles about top-level officials regardless of GNG, but there's no need to address that here.) Article seems fine. -- Visviva ( talk) 21:02, 29 December 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.