Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James W. Morgan
if somebody can actually show some solid sources before closure, '''delete''' otherwise. Birmingham is certainly a large enough city that a substantive and properly sourced article about a mayor ''would'' be deemed to pass  #2, but the role is not so "inherently" notable that we would need to keep a short |primary sourced stub which states ''only'' that the person ''existed'', the end. And while it is true that it's entirely possible to write a bad, seemingly deletable article about a person who actually passes our notability criteria, the saving play in a case like that is not simply ''presuming'' that better sources ''probably'' exist, but ''showing'' hard proof that better sources ''do'' exist (and I can't be the angel of salvation here, as I only have access to ''Canadian'' sourcing in his era, not the American kind where he might actually have some coverage.) So this needs to go if it doesn't see improvement, and then can certainly be recreated again in the future if somebody actually puts in the effort to write and source something better than this — but as it stands, nothing about him is so "inherently" notable that it would be necessary to keep it in ''this'' form
— User:Bearcat, 19:53, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NPOL||WP:PRIMARYSOURCES (Wikipedia:Notability)