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 office of city clerk is not an inherently notable position and there are no independent sources to demonstrate that it meets
WP:GNG.
Hirolovesswords (
talk) 19:16, 27 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep - the city clerk of any particular city is responsible for the official documents of the municipality. One can reasonably expect that the city clerk's name appears on thousands of historical documents. In the course of doing historical research, one may find that the identity of the city clerk is key to finding, dating and making other connections with the information being researched. In this particular case, Bakersfield is a county seat, so we can reasonably multiply this effect significantly.
Greg Bard (
talk) 19:36, 27 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Randykitty (
talk) 17:00, 5 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete The office of city clerk is not in itself notable, even in much larger cities, and there is no independent coverage to suggest that this particular office is notable. --
MelanieN (
talk) 19:33, 5 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete -
City clerk as a general topic is notable, the specific position for one mid-sized California town is not. This seems to be part of an ill-considered grouplet of Bakersfield bureaucratic trivia articles.
Carrite (
talk) 21:03, 5 June 2014 (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.