Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Millar (engineer)
without prejudice against recreation in the future if and when somebody can write and source something much better than this. At the state level, nationalizing coverage is not as essential as it is at the municipal level — it certainly wouldn't hurt if there were some, but at the state level of office there's no inherent requirement for there to be ''any''. What's more determinative here, rather, is that three of the four footnotes are |primary sources that are not support for notability at all, with just ''one'' piece of real, notability-supporting |reliable source media coverage shown at all. This is a role where an article would be fine if you could get him over  on the quality and depth of sourcing, not an "inherently" notable role for which he would be entitled to keep an article that has to depend almost entirely on primary sources — but on a Google search, I'm ''not'' seeing any real evidence that Millar has equivalent coverage to Hilary Franz: I'm seeing a lot of sources that glancingly ''namecheck'' his existence in the context of being about transportation ''projects'' in the state, but ''not'' a lot of sources that are ''about him'' for the purposes of establishing his notability. I will note that his predecessor, Lynn Peterson, does not have an article at all — I've only been able to find ''one'' earlier holder of this role who ''does'' have an article, Sid Morrison, and he has an article for having been a member of the United States House of Representatives, not for this role per se. This role would be enough if the sourcing were better — but it's not a role where it would be so critically important to keep an article about him that he would be ''exempted'' from having to show better sources than this
— User:Bearcat, 14:37, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:PRIMARYSOURCES||WP:RS||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:No original research)