Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanley Simon

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. (non-admin closure) Femke (talk) 09:07, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley Simon

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Article subject fails to meet the relevant notability guideline — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghiewag (talk • contribs)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:07, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nomination fails to meet the relevant minimum standard for arguing a delete nomination. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:20, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Following up, here - subject seems perfectly notable to me and clearly passes WP:GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:29, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no notable sources found, seems to be mid-level local politician and lawyer. Oaktree b (talk) 17:01, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, New York City is an extremely large an important city, to the extent that its City Councillors, and especially its Borough Presidents, are considered to pass WP:NPOL. In any case, a cursory search of newspapers.com finds plenty of non-routine coverage; take this in The Los Angeles Times, this in the New York Daily News along with tons of other coverage, this book extensively covers his re-election campaign in 1985 in the context of a challenge by José E. Serrano, and this was from an extremely brief search. Devonian Wombat (talk) 02:26, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A New York City Councilor is almost always going to be notable, and newspapers.com backs this up, with a plethora of sources providing WP:SIGCOV. WP:OUTCOMES tends to be misused here, but it exists for this particular reason. Curbon7 (talk) 12:05, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable Andrevan@ 21:06, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Devonian Wombat and Curbon7. A solid WP:GNG pass. Sal2100 (talk) 21:23, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:POLOUTCOMES: "Municipal officers: City councillors and other major municipal officers are not automatically notable. But precedent has tended to favor keeping members of the main citywide government of internationally famous metropolitan areas such as Toronto, Chicago, Tokyo, or London." One more for precedent. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 13:50, 27 July 2022 (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.