Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Morrissey (Arizona politician)

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. There is a consensus that coverage of Morressey, in both his role as Mayor and State party chair, does not satisfy either general notability guideline or the political SNG. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:11, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Morrissey (Arizona politician)

[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)

The mayor of Payson, AZ, a town of a little over 15,000. Does not meet WP:NPOL. My prod was removed by the article's creator, AcceptJesus2020. -Crossroads- (talk) 18:04, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -Crossroads- (talk) 18:04, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -Crossroads- (talk) 18:04, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Conservatism-related deletion discussions. -Crossroads- (talk) 18:04, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -Crossroads- (talk) 18:04, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. -Crossroads- (talk) 18:04, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Bearian since you endorsed my prod. -Crossroads- (talk) 18:07, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, this is not meant as a canvass, just to make sure that Bearian saw this to take another look. Also, when the prod was removed, the reason given was This guy was the state chairman of The Arizona Republican Party. This doesn't meet NPOL however. I'm pretty sure state party chairmanship does not constitute statewide office in the sense required. -Crossroads- (talk) 18:36, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I don't see any significant press coverage, so WP:NPOL is surely a slam dunk. Chairman of the Arizona Republican Party doesn't cut it for notability IMO, and there's nothing in the WP:NPOL guideline suggesting it does. Bishonen | talk 18:40, 8 September 2019 (UTC).[reply]
Weak Keep, agree the office doesn't meet WP:NPOL, but I think there is enough coverage for GNG. Lots of articles in the AZ Capitol Times, Phoenix New Times, Huff Post, Arizona Republic, NPR, Politico, Huff Post again. Much of the coverage came from the birther controversy which isn't even in the article. MB 19:29, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - definitely doesn't meet WP:NPOL, however, he does appear to meet WP:GNG, as per the sources found by MB.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:37, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I would have to say that, as the mayor of such a relatively small town, having not received significant news coverage, he doesn't meet WP:NPOL from that front. However, he may meet this standard, and at least meets the general standards for notability, due to his position as the state chair of a major political party. - Navarre0107 (talk) 03:15, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - Thank you for the ping. I'm not sure that being chair of a smaller state party counts for notability. Bearian (talk) 21:02, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete He fails WP:NPOL. Being the head of a state party isn't really notable. Of the sources shown above, I don't think any of them definitively show WP:GNG. Looking through the Arizona Capitol Times news blog, he's really only definitively mentioned in his GOP party chair win (where he got 600 votes) and only received about five or six articles on him during his entire tenure, all of which were routine "Republicans may oust Morrissey" and for his failed run for state parliament - and this is a specialty news source dedicated to local politics. His national news coverage is limited to the birther controversy. Not enough there. SportingFlyer T·C 23:09, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Neither being mayor of a small town nor being state-level organizational chair of a political party constitutes an automatic inclusion freebie under WP:NPOL, but the links shown above are not terribly compelling evidence that he passes WP:GNG in lieu: AZ Capitol Times is a local media outlet covering him in local-interest contexts; his name is not present in the Phoenix New Times article at all, but rather it's about an unrelated person named Bill Tonnesen; HuffPo #1 is just an aggregated reprint of the same Phoenix New Times article that fails to have his name in it; the Arizona Republic article is just about his ability to sing, not about anything relevant to whether he passes NPOL or not; the "NPR" link is not from NPR itself, but from NPR's local affiliate in Flagstaff, and is just a glancing namecheck of his existence in an article that is not substantively about him; and what's left (Politico and HuffPo #2) does not add up to enough coverage to get him over GNG in lieu of having to actually pass an SNG. GNG is not just "anybody who can show that they have surpassed an arbitrary number of mentions in any media outlet" — it also tests for the depth of how substantively any source is or isn't about him, the geographic range of how widely the coverage is spreading and the context of what they're getting covered for, and is not just automatically passed by every single person on earth who can show two media hits about their singing voice. Bearcat (talk) 18:17, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nothing makes him default notable and sourcing is not deep enough to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 07:16, 15 September 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.