Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Hayden Jr.

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. – Joe (talk) 22:50, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

John Hayden Jr.

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

It fails WP:BLP as an WP:NOTE as through a cursory search through google throws up only one result from St. Louis Post Dispatch and that is only in passing. I know he just became Police Commisioner of St. Louis but that does not mean he is notable yet. I suggest wait till he has more sources released. Clarkcj12 (talk) 20:46, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Clarkcj12 (talk) 20:48, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Clarkcj12 (talk) 20:48, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete while the head of police of a major city, such as Hayden, can be notable, they are not default notable, and we need more coverage than what is present here.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:57, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:23, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:23, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Chief of police of a major city with a police force of 1,300 officers. Clearly notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:16, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 21:18, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- Police chiefs (even of large departments) are not usually notable. Of course this could change if he has some major accomplishment while he is chief. But on the job for only a week, I'm sure he hasn't accomplished much.--Rusf10 (talk) 21:34, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The policy ATD prevails over the policy DEL8 when there is a merge target that allows a policy-required preservation of content contributions. Unscintillating (talk) 22:13, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Metropolitan Police Department, City of St. Louis#Departmental History or Chief of the Metropolitan Police Department, City of St. Louis without prejudice to the content contributors of the chosen article continuing to improve the encyclopedia This is a significant topic, already in the encyclopedia in several places. Unscintillating (talk) 22:13, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment AfD nom was place 1 hour and 30 minutes after the article was created, on the day the new police chief was appointed. Checking on the first page of Google web I now see the following articles in:

riverfronttimes.com
3 articles in stltoday.com
stlamerican.com
2 articles in fox2now.com
stlmag.com
bizjournals.com
kmov.com

I added an AP-written article from the Lexington Herald Leader to Chief of the Metropolitan Police Department, City of St. Louis. Unscintillating (talk) 22:38, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Individual clearly has no encyclopedic notability. The St. Louis Police Dept. is arguably notable, but notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. Being hired as the head of a notable organization does not make a living person notable enough to have their own page (basically WP:BLP1E and WP:BIO1E). All the coverage of him used to argue notability is really about the police department and his appointment to run it. It would be sufficient to mention him as the current chief on the police department page, and add any relevant detail about his tenure there. Until he is possibly notable for just this one thing, this unnecessary biography should be deleted per WP:BLP. Shelbystripes (talk) 23:09, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Shelbystripes: Since BLP1E is an argument to merge, was there anything else in WP:BLP that applies? This is asking the same question as "why delete the edit history?" Thanks, Unscintillating (talk) 01:12, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Unscintillating: I'm confused. Why is BLP1E an argument to merge? I didn't argue for merge, I argued for deletion. I said I wouldn't object to someone mentioning him on the St. Louis police page if someone wants to, bur that's it. An entire biography on him shouldn't be merged into that page . BLP1E isn't necessarily an argument for merge, it's an argument for deleting a BLP. I mean, BLP1E says that it "is usually better to merge the information" in one particular case, why even say that if BLP1E = merge as you said? Shelbystripes (talk) 01:35, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The topic here is not a low-profile individual, so that one point alone eliminates WP:BLP1E. But ignoring the points that the topic here is not a low-profile individual, and the announcement only partially qualifies as an event, the rest of the sentence you quoted in WP:BLP1E reads,

"In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article."

So the content is merged (subject to WP:DUE), attribution is retained in the edit history, and the topic itself is redirected. Also, policy is to WP:PRESERVE. How does deletion of the edit history improve the encyclopedia? Unscintillating (talk) 15:24, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I am seeing in depth coverage by reliable sources. --RAN (talk) 14:26, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is significant media coverage of his appointment to the post. While not every police chief of moderately large cities is notable, the unrest following the Ferguson shooting and trial makes this position of particular note. --Flipster14191 (talk) 05:01, 11 January 2018 (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.