Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of mayors of Melbourne, Florida

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 "delete" !votes have the stronger policy-based arguments. LISTN is not met. Randykitty (talk) 08:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of mayors of Melbourne, Florida (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

List of not-notable local politicians. Melbourne is not big enough community to make their officials notable and most people listed here are notable for other reasons if they have an article. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:24, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:24, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:24, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:24, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or merge per what I said here. AdoTang (talk) 17:34, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There's about 20 politicians with articles who are linked in the list, so even if this topic fails WP:LISTN this is a useful navigational aid for readers per WP:LISTPURP. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:25, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep satisfies Wikipedia list requirements. Djflem (talk) 21:19, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete which is also what we need to do with a lot of the entries on the list. The position is notable. Wikipedia needs to stop Melbourmania, before it gets to be a true disease like Dedhammania.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:45, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or merge It fails WP:LISTN (source is primary) and is really poorly formatted (it's done by year, not by person.) The information wouldn't be bad to have somewhere, a cleanup and collapsible table on the main article may be the best bet. SportingFlyer T·C 11:01, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Unlike the above linked Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of mayors of Altamonte Springs, Florida, this one is wp:verifiable, so it should not be deleted under this reason.
  The list is cross-categorization being in the form of "List of X of Y". According to WP:LISTN, for this kind of list, satisfying WP:LISTPURP is often enough to be kept. In this case, there are a reasonable amount of bluelinks in the article, satisfying WP:LISTPURP#Navigation.
  Apart from that, the list seems like a reasonable split from Melbourne, Florida considering the HTML document size of this article (162 kB), which would increase the HTML document size of Melbourne, Florida (317 kB) drastically.
  I will try to improve the list with reference to other similar articles. ~ Aseleste (t, e | c, l) 13:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Cross-categorisation refers to circumstances where X and Y are two completely separate topics. In this instance, "mayors of Melbourne, Florida" is not - it's just 'X,' or a sub-categorisation. Therefore, LISTPURP doesn't really apply, and there's still no evidence these have been referred to as a group or set. Furthermore, a merge to another article is still possible as this article's really poorly formatted and can be easily trimmed down. SportingFlyer T·C 14:54, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete- Does not meet WP:LISTN as the topic is not covered by multiple secondary sources. Also, everyone should be reminded, that Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion--Rusf10 (talk) 03:27, 18 April 2021 (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.