Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Politicians

Points of interest related to Politicians on Wikipedia: Category – WikiProject – Deletions – Cleanup

Deletion Sorting Project
(talk) Project page Lists (by ABC) Lists (by topic) Lists (computer-readable) AfD: Today, Yesterday Delsort scripts
v t e

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Politicians. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Politicians|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Politicians. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Purge page cache

watch

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Politics for a general list of deletion debates on related issues.

Fretïmio Assocão di Planka (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Suspected hoax created by sockpuppet account. No results for this name in JSTOR, and the picture is of Willie J. Hagan. Joofjoof (talk) 04:10, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Africa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:50, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete G3. I agree it’s a hoax. Mccapra (talk) 07:03, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete: per nomination and G3. SirMemeGod  19:00, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vít Šimral (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NPOL or WP:GNG. Members of the city council of say Prague must pass GNG, which this subject does not pass either. Sources are not GNG-worthy. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:55, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Economics, and Czech Republic. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:21, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Czech Pirate Party as ATD where his name is mentioned. Have you tried using translation by any chance? I also was wondering... Are there similar articles of politicians like him who pass WP:GNG? ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:37, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Czech Pirate Party, there's even a picture of him there... Jdcooper (talk) 21:45, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akhmed Yakoob (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG or WP:NPOL, candidacy doesn't count towards NPOL, by the way, they have to be elected to the office. For GNG, the sources used are routine coverages of the racism incident, etc. No WP:SIGCOV can be identified. One of the BBC source even does not have a byline, while you might thing it's almighty BBC, but sorry, we can not rely on a news piece that lacks a byline, whether from an international news org or a local one. A WP:BEFORE was done and the nature of the sources found there does not help, they either routine coverages or run of the mill. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:33, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Law, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to 2024 West Midlands mayoral election as page fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. This page was originally a redirect, and should return to being a redirect. The name is a notable redirect to the events discussed in the mayoral election article, but not as a standalone page. If he'd been elected to office then it would be a different story. This is Paul (talk) 19:17, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Eaves (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Lack of independant notabilityWP:notinherited. Redirect to wife? TheLongTone (talk) 14:20, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and North Carolina. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:24, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I'm going to take this opportunity to bring up WP:NPPHOUR, as this was nominated for deletion 22 minutes after being converted from a redirect to an article. Also noting that the redirect's creator was notified, not the person who converted it to an article (pinging Willthacheerleader18). Hey man im josh (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hey man im josh Thanks for the heads up! -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:48, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as subject is the first "First Gentleman" of North Carolina. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:45, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He also launched the Students@Work educational program for middle school students in North Carolina and Carolina Helping Heroes for military spouses. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 16:16, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Willthacheerleader18 (talk · contribs) makes a great point about being the first First Gentleman. Snowman304|talk 04:45, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. While we have a large number of first spouse articles, I don't think most, and not Bob Eaves, meet GNG. A couple of assigned statewide initiatives would make GNG meaningless.--Mpen320 (talk) 14:57, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 state visit by Kais Saied to China (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

There is no indication of notability for this visit. The sources are almost entirely government press releases and should be more WP:DIVERSE for independent notability. The page should be deleted and perhaps parts merged into the main Kais Saied article. Amigao (talk) 13:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Bilateral relations, Events, Tunisia, and China. Skynxnex (talk) 14:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• KEEP - Kais Saied is the President of Tunisia. Notability for the visit is an extremely big deal. I linked an independent English language source (2024 China-United States Exchange Foundation) under External links. They're building valuable contacts in a world that seems to be exploding, "Although there is no visible alienation between Tunisia and the European Union, the gradual distancing between Tunisia and the United States has become increasingly apparent." — Maile (talk) 00:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Mitrosz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Tagged for BLP sourcing issues since 2008. Not clear the the subject meets WP:GNG. 4meter4 (talk) 18:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Politicians, and Women. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:53, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Dr. Blofeld This seems to be your creation. Could you please have a look? Authority control databases kicked up some links, but I'm having trouble reading the results. Thanks for whatever input you can give. — Maile (talk) 22:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nipun Roy Chowdhury (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No inherent notability. Subject fails WP:NPOL or WP:GNG. BEFORE wasn't helpful. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 15:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, plenty of coverage, so WP:GNG should be fine. See for example [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]. Oh, there are TV clips as well: [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], etc etc. --Soman (talk) 00:37, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Nom is correct that she does not meet WP:NPOL, but as Soman has demonstrated, frequent coverage of her "fiery speeches and run ins with the police" over the past six years does meet WP:GNG, even if the present state of the article doesn't reflect that. --Worldbruce (talk) 22:27, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Debangshu Bhattacharya (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No inherent notability here. Subject fails WP:NPOL, and I've checked the cited sources, none could satisfy WP:GNG criteria. The regular WP:ROTM sources we get during election periods. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging @Sohom Datta: who reviewed and @Toweli: who previously redirected to Trinamool Congress said that the accepted version was better improved than that of earlier version before redirected.--☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️^{(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)} 11:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Fails WP:NPOL. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as politician is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. The subject is not a major political figure and has not held international, national, or state/province–wide office. Subject was a contestant from West Bengal representing All India Trinamool Congress political party in Lok Sabha Elections 2024 from Tamluk and lost. RangersRus (talk) 12:24, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Per WP:THREE, If you kindly read its talk page that I provided certain sources that may pass WP:SIRS, following which the draft was accepted. Not always it is necessary to pass per NPOL case. I can even explain further if requested. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️^{(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)} 18:27, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Davood Noroozi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No inherent notability, fails WP:GNG, WP:NPOL or WP:ANYBIO. BEFORE was not productive. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Journalism, and Iran. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Benedikte Pryneid Hansen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No inherent notability, fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Nothing useful came from WP:BEFORE. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Norway. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Internal party apparatchiks are rarely notable enough to meet WP:NPOL. From a brief perusal of the Red Party (Norway) article, the Secretary General of the party is not the front-facing leader, nor does it look like an internally elected position (though I may be wrong on the latter point). Bkissin (talk) 15:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ankit Jain (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Doesn't meet WP:NPOL as an election candidate, fails WP:NBASIC otherwise. C F A 💬 16:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Washington, D.C.. C F A 💬 16:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the election is uncontested (Green Party didn't field a nominee) and less than a month away. The position of Shadow Senator is a federal position, equivalent to a senator. There's also a decent amount of coverage already [21][22][23] Microplastic Consumer (talk) 17:10, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not denying they would meet NPOL if elected, but they don't right now. Routine election coverage of candidates is expected and doesn't really count towards anything. I would support a draftification that can be reverted if they win, but right now they are not notable. C F A 💬 17:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the coverage is decent as is, what reason is there to get rid of the article of a person who has a 99.9999% chance of being elected into office just before an election? Microplastic Consumer (talk) 18:19, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just a comment, a Republican did file and will be on the ballot. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 14:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or draftify per nom (lean draftify IMO). I've talked with the page creator about WP:NPOL already, including a bit about how a candidate's article was not put into mainspace until he actually won the election. Right now, on the page, there are four sources, two are routine coverage, one is an endorsement, and one is Wikipedia:BALLOTPEDIA. Searching on Google doesn't yield much that can be added. They don't seem to pass NPOL or WP:GNG until he actually wins the election. reppop^talk 19:05, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also wouldn't be opposed to draftifying the article until November. Bkissin (talk) 20:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to 2024 United States Shadow Senator election in the District of Columbia for now. Recreate when he wins in November. WP:NOTCRYSTAL, things happen between now and election day and as of right now Jain remains an unelected private citizen. Bkissin (talk) 20:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to 2024 United States Shadow Senator election in the District of Columbia for now. Recreate after November as/if needed.Djflem (talk) 18:15, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Praveen Singh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Praveen Singh does not meet the qualifications for a Wikipedia page, especially under the WP:NPOL notability guidelines. His role as a block pramukh lacks national significance and does not represent a state or province-level office in India. Note: This page is being nominated as part of an ongoing New Page Patrol (NPP) training exercise. Charlie (talk) 13:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India. Charlie (talk) 13:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Doesn't meet notability criteria. --Ratekreel (talk) 14:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Clearly fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG; the sources do not provide WP:SIGCOV. Best wishes to the nominator for NPP School. GrabUp - Talk 14:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this article should be kept as Praveen Singh has been a notable political figure in Uttar Pradesh with significant contributions to regional politics, being a local i am aware he's going to contest for block elections in 2026 from Machhrehta Block. In case of India, the Panchayati Raj system still prevails and for Indians the block levels are really significant offices in government. IndianQuest (talk) 17:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@IndianQuest: Let him contest and win the Block-level election; only then can the article be recreated and retained. Currently, he does not meet the notability criteria according to Wikipedia’s guidelines. GrabUp - Talk 03:09, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GrabUp block level elections are insignificant. He must win either national elections (to become a Member of Parliament) or state-wide legislative elections (to become a Member of the Legislative Assembly). Charlie (talk) 03:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CharlieMehta: I thought Block-level elections meant MLA elections, as every MLA is elected from blocks in a district. GrabUp - Talk 04:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The hierarchy is as follows: Gram Panchayat (village level), Block Panchayat (a group of Gram Panchayats at the intermediary level), and Zilla Panchayat (comprising several Block Panchayats). A constituency district typically includes at least one city municipal corporation, a few municipal councils, and several Zilla Panchayats. To represent the area, an MLA must be elected across the entire constituency. Charlie (talk) 05:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explaination😉 GrabUp - Talk 06:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes very well explained. So far he has only been contesting for block elections. IndianQuest (talk) 08:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Per nom. Poor and unreliable sources from a personal self published youtube videos, Facebook and WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Fails WP:NPOL. The degree of significance of the subject and of role as politician is not enough to warrant a page on the subject. RangersRus (talk) 12:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: does not meet the qualifications for a Wikipedia page, especially under the WP:NPOL notability guidelines. Youknow? (talk) 14:06, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per RangersRus. Even if he’s a party block (committee person), that’s not notable. I was an equivalent, county committee member, and that’s not notable. I also agree that the sourcing is not reliable. Bearian (talk) 00:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2028 Cypriot presidential election (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Sounds like a violation of WP:NOTCRYSTAL. The election is more than 3 years from now Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Politics. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cyprus-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Not sure if the nominator has read NOTCRYSTAL, but the first bullet point of it says "Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." This is clearly a scheduled and notable event that is almost certain to take place. What has generally been regarded to be a valid reason for nominating future election articles for deletion is a lack of information specific to the election in question. However, in this case there are numerous sources for the potential candidates for this election. As a result, I don't see a valid reason to delete it. Cheers, Number 57 17:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Number 57. A scheduled and notable event with with reliable sourcing specific to the election. Sal2100 (talk) 16:08, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lily Tang Williams (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable congressional candidate. Winning a U.S. House primary does not entitle someone to a Wikipedia page, and I don't see how she passes GNG. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 18:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Politicians, Women, China, Colorado, New Hampshire, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to 2024 United States House of Representatives elections in New Hampshire#District 2. Candidates rarely, if ever, meet the notability conditions of WP:NPOL, see WP:POLOUTCOMES. If she wins in November, we can reassess. But for now, her bio should be merged into the article about the election. Bkissin (talk) 19:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator here, I would support a redirect to that page. This will be be her most high-profile run for office, clearly trumping her 2022 run for this district where she lost in the primary and her 2016 Colorado Senate bid where she took 3% of the vote. The 2024 page is the best redirect target. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 21:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oof, I forgot that she has lost multiple elections. I don't know where the best redirect target would be, but if you think it's best for 2024, I'll defer to you. Bkissin (talk) 15:49, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect per nom and Bkissin, eight of the 10 references are for her winning the Republican nomination for the district, and not really about her specifically. reppop^talk 21:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep

There's quite a few sources about her immigration/escape from China, if that matters, such as:

Interview with John Stossel 6 years ago:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxMWs8RyLLI:

https://thepoliticswatcher.com/pages/articles/congress/2024/9/10/lily-tang-williams-republican-candidate-unique-perspective

https://bunewsservice.com/lily-tang-williams-living-the-american-dream/

https://www.heritage.org/asia/heritage-explains/lily-tang-williams-growing-communist-china

From UK (though the Daily Mail is marginal):

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13146007/lily-tang-williams-congressional-candidate-republican-biden-border.html

From Japan:

https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2024/01/5f210f5b6a3e-focus-asian-americans-voice-reasons-they-back-republicans-in-new-hampshire.html

And actually being in a debate with a sitting Senator as a Libertarian, which pretty much has never happened ("In a first, Libertarian candidate in Colorado’s U.S. Senate race qualifies for major debate"):

https://www.denverpost.com/2016/09/06/lily-tang-williams-libertarian-candidate-colorados-us-senate-debate/

https://www.denverpost.com/2016/09/08/what-lily-tang-williams-said-colorado-libertarian-u-s-senate/

https://www.dailycamera.com/2016/10/15/lily-tang-williams-us-senate/

Colorado Public Radio:

https://www.cpr.org/show-segment/childhood-in-china-shapes-libertarian-senate-candidates-vision-for-colorado-country/

I'm not sure if Fox News is considered a credible source, but there's more about her & China:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/survivor-maos-political-purge-getting-ptsd-watching-scary-history-repeat-college-campuses

https://www.foxnews.com/media/chinese-immigrant-running-congress-fears-marxism-followed-us-witnessing-youth-indoctrination

https://nypost.com/2024/05/15/us-news/survivor-of-maos-political-purge-getting-ptsd-watching-history-repeat-on-college-campuses/

More about China and the gun control debate with David Hogg:

https://www.westernjournal.com/watch-gun-control-activist-david-hogg-torched-ccp-survivor-go-china-see-gun-control-works/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.147.125.13 (talk) 22:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"thepoliticswatcher.com" is a random site that does not help to establish notability. Same for bunewsservice which is a college newspaper. The Heritage Foundation is not a news outlet and I shouldn't have to explain why that one doesn't count. Daily Mail is considered a deprecated source, while Fox News, Western Journal, and the New York Post are considered "generally unreliable." Getting invited to a debate is interesting but certainly not proof that she deserves a Wikipedia page. Sometimes third-party candidates get invited to a debate, it's not that rare. The Kyodo News and Reason sources are decent, but I stand by my judgment that she's not notable. Rising somewhat above the level of a random congressional candidate is not enough for a Wikipedia page. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 04:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since when are college newspapers not considered valid supporting sources? Heritage Foundation may not be a news outlet but its not deprecated and a highly influential conservative think tank. "Generally" unreliable sources need to be analyzed in totality not in part, so if there are 3 "generally" unreliable sources, a rational determination needs to be made as to whether the small part of them that is reliable is strong enough to create notability. Wickster12345 (talk) 04:30, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an academic journal reference where she appears: "Academic Marxism in the Crosshairs: What is at Stake in the U.S.?" in Class, Race and Corporate Power, Vol. 12, No. 1 (2024). https://www.jstor.org/stable/48771892 216.147.125.142 (talk) 15:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep For the exact same reasoning as SineBot above. Plenty of independent coverage Wickster12345 (talk) 23:42, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep subject looks notable and has enough news coverage as indicated above.Mysecretgarden (talk) 04:55, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean when you say she "looks notable" BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 14:36, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

means it is notable. Mysecretgarden (talk) 17:57, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What? I'm asking you *why* you think she's notable BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 18:47, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I assume they meant for the same reasons as noted by SineBot, as they also said: “…has enough news coverage as indicated above”.

Do you, BottleOfChocolateMilk, have any response to what SineBot had to say, as they are the one whose argument seems to inspiring the majority of “Keep” votes Wickster12345 (talk) 22:46, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uh...yes? I directly replied to their message right after they posted it. Also, that message was not posted by SineBot, it was posted by an IP user. SineBot is the bot that automatically adds a signature to people who don't sign their comments. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 01:12, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect makes the most sense to me. --Woko Sapien (talk) 21:07, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep is probably the best option, as she has recieved significant media coverage over numerous years and as a more minor side note, she is a major contender for a swing seat in 2024. NathanBru (talk)

Being an unelected candidate for office does not automatically make someone notable; see WP:NPOL. Also, calling NH-02 a "swing district" is a stretch. Every major election forecaster has it rated as Likely or Safe D. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 01:12, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But like a previously stated, that was a minor detail. She has recieved significant media coverage and does represent a district that very well could swing her way in 2024. Also, I know we’re not supposed to compare certain cases to each other, but there have been numerous other instances of less notable people in 2024 with Wikipedia articles. NathanBru (talk)

• Keep because she has recieved substantial media coverage from major news outlets for both her 2022 and 2024 runs and has appeared in a documentary (The Great Awakening). 1980RWR (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 02:50, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep for the reasons listed above. She has received substantial media coverage for her 2022 and 2024 congressional campaigns and for her 2016 U.S. Senate campaign as a Libertarian, has appeared in documentaries, and has been interviewed by national media organizations like Fox News and Newsmax. There's also precedent for people equally and even less significant than Lily Tang Williams having a Wikipedia article. George Hansel is a former small town mayor who unsuccessfully ran for Congress once and now hosts a regional talk show (the station that hosts Hansel's show is so small that it doesn't even broadcast to me, and I live in New Hampshire only an hour away from Keene); Hansel is arguably no more significant than any other local politician, yet considering his article has existed for nearly 3 years without issue, there seems to be no question that he is worthy of a Wikipedia article. Lily Tang Williams is much more significant than Hansel and I would argue that she just as deserving of a Wikipedia article, if not more so, than him. Eureka640 (talk) 03:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 16:05, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then ignore the Hansel argument. The fact still remains that she has been the subject of much media coverage over the past decade for her Libertarian activism and congressional candidacies, including interviews on major national news stations. Eureka640 (talk) 18:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, WP:GNG is met through the sheer number of sources (per above). Microplastic Consumer (talk) 14:37, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Reminder that deletion discussions are WP:NOTAVOTE and are also dependent on the quality and reliability of sources, not just the sheer number of sources. Bkissin (talk) 20:49, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Reminder that she's been covered in the New York Times, the Boston Globe, WMUR-TV (ABC), The Denver Post, the Concord Monitor, the Union Leader, New Hampshire Public Radio, Colorado Public Radio, and an academic journal (noted above). All of those are considered "quality" and "reliable" per Wikipedia's criteria. 216.147.125.142 (talk) 23:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Reminder that those are WP:ROUTINE election coverage. reppop^talk 23:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_is_and_is_not_routine_coverage

  "Editors should be careful in defining what is referred to as "routine" coverage, especially when determining notability."

  ...

  ""routine coverage" is not a disqualification for notability."

  ""routine coverage" may indeed be significant enough to surpass Wikipedia's general notability guideline."

  Politics

  "Once every four years, the United States holds an election for President. These elections are "routinely" covered by every news outlet and the event is a "pre-planned event" as a part of the United States Constitution. However, that does not mean that this coverage would be excluded from notability discussions because of the WP:ROUTINE guideline." 216.147.125.142 (talk) 23:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Also:

  "Additionally, bear in mind that WP:ROUTINE is a subsection of the guideline Wikipedia:Notability (events) and therefore only applies to establishing notability about events. The primary guideline discussing notability of people is Wikipedia:Notability (people)." 216.147.125.142 (talk) 23:44, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYi, it was missed that she has been in Fox News on multiple occasions, another extremely notable source. NathanBru (talk)

• Keep as WP:GNG is satisfied with the significant media coverage over the years of the subject's political/electoral history. - Amigao (talk) 15:10, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A source evaluation table would be really helpful here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:29, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This shouldn't be relisted. There was enough discussion. Nine keeps and three redirects. There are plenty of legit sources listed. None of the actual content itself has been disputed.

Even if there wasn't a clear enough consensus in your mind:

"When discussions of proposals to delete articles, media, or other pages end without consensus, the normal result is the content being kept"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#No_consensus

"relisting should not be a substitute for a no consensus closure".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_process#Relisting_discussions

Making an evaluation table is just tedious work. If you think it would be helpful to have the table, you should create it yourself. 216.147.123.209 (talk) 12:05, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as per Asilvering Bluethricecreamman (talk) 04:31, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Alberto Fujimori (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Single event, unlikely to garner more details (that would arguably add to the lack of notability of the event), already covered in Fujimori's page. Fails WP:1E, WP:GNG. Cabrils (talk) 02:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Events, and Peru. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete pointless stub. No scope for expansion and not even worth redirecting IMV. Mccapra (talk) 05:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and expand It is highly notable, but just needs an expansion. dunno if a convict will have a state funeral, but that is notable iniself.Sportsnut24 (talk) 05:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

:Keep and wait it's likely that the consequences of Fujimori's death will be notable; he will be getting a state funeral per El País and there will be more to come. If by the end of the seven days there's nothing notable that's happened, then I'll change my vote. Jaguarnik (talk) 07:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Completely sufficient to cover this in the main article. Violates WP:NOTNEWS. Having a state funeral (or not) is in no way a reason for a content fork. Geschichte (talk) 07:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The man has just died, there's little point in nominating the article now, how big the event will be is WP:CRYSTAL. Besides, the article passes WP:GNG and the funeral itself and its aftermath are yet to happen. I would like to point out that this isn’t just any state funeral; this was one of if not the most influential figure in Peruvian politics and across Latin America. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The guy may be influential, but the circumstances of death doesn't really ring much. If it were an extraordinary COD it may have passed GNG. As for the funeral it is WP:CRYSTAL. Borgenland (talk) 08:34, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keepwithout prejudice to re-nominating later or userfying if it turns out there's not much to say.

In my experience, these notnews/crystal deletions are typically pointless -- the news keeps rolling in, and the article gets edited, until it's clear whether it's notable. The deletion rationale seems simple at the front end, but trying to discuss notability as new articles get added daily is like trying to sweep back the tides ("relisting, anyone care to comment on the new sources identified above?")

merge to Alberto Fujimori. Very little of note was reported around his funeral; it appears no attendance or accolades from world leaders; nothing significant surrounding the event itself. Oblivy (talk) 09:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as per Jaguarnik's article assuring a state funeral. It’s not just the death, it’s the event, and who shows up. All will be reported. Hyperbolick (talk) 09:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Completely sufficient to cover this in the main article. --UpEpSilon (talk) 10:17, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: And Wait. Let's see how this story develops Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 14:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Main article can easily cover this. "Death of [Person]" articles do not need to exist separately from biographical articles that the person already had — they're created only where the death itself is a notable event but the person was not independently notable enough to get a conventional biographical article at all, meaning that they exist instead of a biographical article about the dead person, not as a supplement to a biographical article about the dead person. The deaths of already-notable people with biographical articles are covered in the biographical article, not in separate death-of spinoffs. Bearcat (talk) 14:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Although there's WP:SIGCOV, Fujimori already has an article. There's no need for a second one detailing his death - all new information can be added to the main article.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge/delete Yet another absurd rush to create separate and redundant pages. Add content to Alberto Fujimori#Illness and death, then propose a split if there's sufficient content. The main article also has a whole Legacy section that would cover how people react to his death. If you think the main article is too long, move other content to the several existing subarticles rather than jumping to make another. Reywas92^Talk 17:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as there is in fact scope for expansion and Fujimori was a notable political figure. Jang317 (talk) 18:46, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notable political figures who already had biographical articles do not get their deaths spun off to separate "death of notable figure" articles — "Death of X" articles exist only for people who were not already notable in life so that the death itself is their entire basis for notability, and people who were already notable in life have their deaths covered in the biographical article rather than in a separate content fork. Bearcat (talk) 22:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this meant to be opinion or a statement of policy/guidelines/consensus? There many articles, for example Death and state funeral of Ruhollah Khomeini, Death of Li Keqiang, Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II and so on, for people who were extremely notable in life. I'm not arguing for WP:OTHER, but I genuinely wonder if what you are saying is a policy, guideline, or even a consensus in the community.

N.B. [[Category:Deaths and funerals of politicians]] appears to support my point above about apparent lack of consensus for the position that these articles are not for people who were famous in life. Oblivy (talk) 22:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – An event that had repercussions throughout South America. Svartner (talk) 10:15, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge/delete - Death by old age is not unusual, its not like an assassination or a suicide. Reactions to his death are better included at his own article to boost the Legacy section to tell us what impact he had - these reactions are not to his death but to him as a person (whether positive or negative). While there will be a state funeral, it does not seem like the type of long-term ceremonies that were held for people like Queen Elizabeth II (like at Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II). So most of this content is either already in the bio article or can be easily merged, and a separate article is unnecessary. --Masem (t) 12:25, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as a separate article for the death of a state leader feels unnecessary. Unless more specific information is released that deems this article to be noteworthy, the information presented within this article would fit best with the original Alberto Fujimori article.--Ch3sp1n13 (talk) 10:11, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Article has been sufficiently expanded. Ian P. Tetriss (talk) 00:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge - Article does seem relevant, however the fact that it died by old age it’s not notable and the funeral and aftermath can be easily merged in the main article. Protoeus (talk) 01:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, expanded. RodRabelo7 (talk) 01:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Article now renamed by me to Death and state funeral of Alberto Fujimori. State funeral has happened. Hyperbolick (talk) 02:26, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep The death of a notorious president. ArionStar (talk) 07:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - A important event. Many other "Death of ____" articles exist. This isn't just the death of a random diplomat. It is the former President of Peru, who is notorious. Wheatley2 (speak to me) (watch me) 09:01, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – Sure he was famous/infamous/notorious but I don't see anything about his death that merits its own article. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 09:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge / Delete The manner of his death was not newsworthy in itself, the funeral will be covered, but IMHO doesn’t need its own page when it can be used to cap off the main page about him instead.

Absurdum4242 (talk) 17:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep : I think this a Wikipedia-worthy article. The death of a president, in this case an authoritarian leader who had a lot of controversies while he ruled seems like a notable topic to me. Similarly, the future events as regards his funeral is also something to look out for given his legacies. Instead of a deletion nomination, I’ll suggest the article is kept and developed as more eventful information unfolds.additional comment the funeral held already but I’ll still retain my ‘keep-vote’.

Mevoelo (talk) 02:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep death of a famous president and public figure, as well as his state funeral Scuba 14:51, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone's making crap up again. There is no guideline that says state funerals are entitled to standalone articles. The content about the president's death can be covered in the president's own article. Reywas92^Talk 20:04, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the state funeral itself is a significant event for a controversial autocrat. Altorespite 🌿 18:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting this discussion. While we have had great participation here, almost every editor is focusing on the wrong question, whether or not you, as a person, think this event "deserves" an article. That factor is not important here. We assess discussions based on policies that are relevant and just as importantly, what reliable sources support. This article has been expanded since its nomination but I see no editors providing a review of the sources. This is what is needed to determine its notability, not opinions on whether or not this is an important event. Also, please do not move this article during this AFD discussion, or closure tools, XFDcloser can't decipher what to do when the page title of the article is different from the one at the top of this discussion page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge back into original article, leaving no redirect. Hey, a notable person (we went to the same university) dies; there is a funeral, etc. But that does not in any way justify a separate article about the guy dying. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:34, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. There's nothing notable about Fujimori's death. Most of the coverage just mentions that the guy died, with details being about his career, not the death or funeral. Cortador (talk) 21:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge 18 of the 39 sources discuss his funeral/national mourning in Peru, and 11 of the sources talk about the reactions to his death, so I would not say that the death lacks notable coverage, but his death was very ordinary and will not have sustained coverage; most of the details can be added to his article. Jaguarnik (talk) 21:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darrell Castle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NPOL, WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. Routine coverage, interviews, profiles, election news. No indication of signficance. scope_creep^Talk 08:23, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Law, and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete due to notability issues. If there is an appropriate article, then redirect. 21 Andromedae (talk) 14:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, As a presidential nominee, Castle did better than any other Constitution Party candidate in both of his runs, winning nearly 200k votes each time. He was endorsed by Glenn Beck in 2016 and got some meaningful coverage [24][25][26][27]

As a lawyer, he founded Darrell Castle & Associates and has been interviewed by the New York Times earlier this year relating to the sale of Graceland. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 22:10, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - besides being on the ballot in multiple states, there is significant coverage. Bearian (talk) 00:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per reliable sources in this discussion and in article. If not kept, all content should be merged to Darrell Castle 2016 presidential campaign.--User:Namiba 14:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of mayors of Barboursville, West Virginia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

A mostly unsourced and thus unverifiable list of non-notable mayors of a "village". Fails WP:NLIST. AusLondonder (talk) 12:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Politics, and West Virginia. AusLondonder (talk) 12:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: The list seems to be referenced by Ref 1 (HMdb.org), but still this appears to be a village of 4000 people with non-notable mayors. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: the nominator and second seem to be conflating the population of Barboursville with the notability of this list. The word "village" doesn't determine notability; populated places have generally been deemed notable, irrespective of their size. Additionally Barboursville is an incorporated municipality under the laws of West Virginia, and under West Virginia Code § 8-1-3 Barboursville has been a "class III city" since 1960, and would have been a "class IV town or village" before that. It was also the county seat from 1813 to 1888. As an incorporated municipality, a list of Barboursville's mayors is appropriate, and could be included in the article about Barboursville, without having to demonstrate their individual notability; here, the list has been split out into its own article, because it is fairly long, covering over two hundred years. As a separate issue, the city's own official publications are not independent, and therefore do not count toward establishing the significance, and thus notability of its individual mayors; but as official government publications they may be considered authoritative as to the names of the persons who held that position and at what points in time. I believe that better sources are available for most or all of the mayors, and will visit the library today to find out. P Aculeius (talk) 13:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I am not suggesting Barboursville itself is non-notable. I do on the other hand believe a list of all mayors of a relatively small locality is not notable. AusLondonder (talk) 14:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The list itself meets WP:LISTCRITERIA, the question is whether it should be a separate page or back in the city article. I view these pages as a valid page split (WP:SPLIT) as the content is verifiable, and could be included in the parent article, but because of the size of the content, does not always belong in the parent article. If the information was in the parent article, we would not be having this discussion about notablilty. --Enos733 (talk) 21:43, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Update: I thought the list went back to the beginning, but it only seems to go back to the late 19th century. I did find some materials supporting this list at the public library in Barboursville, but only going back as far as this list does. They're not great sources, but they're published and available for review—anyone can go and check them. At least one was based on the same source listed here: the Barboursville monument with a list of mayors. That's not ideal, but public monuments should probably be treated as official statements by the city, subject to correction using better sources. I'll see about whether any of the other sources make sense to incorporate here. At worst, the list could perhaps be incorporated back into the article about Barboursville, but deletion does not make sense. P Aculeius (talk) 22:21, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:23, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. What reason would we ever need a standalone list of utterly non-notable people, regardless of whether it's verifiable? That's stuff for a town website or directory, not a global encyclopedia. JoelleJay (talk) 05:56, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Barboursville under a newly created heading (mayors or politics). The article isn't too long, should it become too long: the list can always be collapsed. It is sourced information. Rolluik (talk) 18:17, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of mayors of Warner Robins, Georgia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

List of mostly unnotable local politicians. Roasted (talk) 00:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Politics, and Georgia (U.S. state). Roasted (talk) 00:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - "mostly unnotable local politicians" is not defined, because most of them are still red links. Please see WP:REDLINKS. I think if you look through "Category:Lists of mayors of places in Georgia (U.S. state)" you will find the same un-sourced situation on all of them. And for that matter, it seems to be a trend for most mayoral lists. These are the kinds of lists that are works in progress, and therefore should not be deleted. — Maile (talk) 01:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Redlinks "indicate that a page will be created soon or that an article should be created for the topic because the subject is notable and verifiable" - few of those mayors seem notable, to be honest. AusLondonder (talk) 07:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do you arrive at "few of those mayors seem notable" just by looking at a red link name? — Maile (talk) 11:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's generally uncommon for mayors of smaller cities to be notable, per WP:NPOL which states that "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability." Mayors are frequently deleted at AfD. AusLondonder (talk) 12:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Especially since all the mayors currently with articles are under PRODs. Roasted (talk) 21:59, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep invalid nom. (see Wikipedia:LISTCRITERIA) Djflem (talk) 06:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Completely unsourced list of non-notable local politicians. These lists are frequently deleted. AusLondonder (talk) 07:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The list itself meets WP:LISTCRITERIA, the question is whether it should be a separate page or back in the city article. I view these pages as a valid page split (WP:SPLIT) as the content is verifiable, and could be included in the parent article, but because of the size of the content, does not always belong in the parent article. If the information was in the parent article, we would not be having this discussion about notablilty. --Enos733 (talk) 21:42, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is no consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:44, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. There are zero sources, so WP:V is not here. Looks like zero notable entries, too (blue links look temporary). What exactly is the value of this standalone list? If merged into the article, at least more eyes would be looking at it. --Викидим (talk) 03:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. A list with zero sources, of apparently non-notable people, is not encyclopedic. JoelleJay (talk) 02:13, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Still no consensus and disagreement over whether or not this article satisfies list criteria.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:39, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Ellis (police commissioner) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Local elected officials are not notable through WP:NPOL, the one source listed is a run of the mill election report, which does not contribute to the subject passing WP:GNG. -Samoht27 (talk) 21:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Police, Politics, and England. -Samoht27 (talk) 21:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:OFFICEHOLDER. The article is short and needs updating but is about a holder of a notable office who held the post for two terms. This discussion has been had on previous occasions, but do note that the office of police commissioners in the UK is different to that of a police commissioner in the United States. This is Paul (talk) 22:12, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PCCs (including this one) have received significant press coverage, albeit often on a local level. A police constituency can cover a population of several hundred thousand, or even into the millions. Indeed, the population of the Staffordshire area is around 1.146 million. Compare that to a Member of Parliament, whose constituency contains roughly 76,000 people, and a London Assembly member, whose constituency covers less than a million. Consequently it is a notable post, and the holder of it is likely to attract ongoing media attention, thus making them notable. As I have said previously, the consensus at the time these offices were created was that they were notable in the same way we create articles for every MP, MSP, Member of the Senedd and so on. I've also suggested that perhaps what is needed is a wider debate on how we deal with articles about people who hold these posts. This is Paul (talk) 22:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing in NPOL that covers police and crime commissioners. AusLondonder (talk) 00:33, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's something we should address though because these articles get nominated for AfD from time to time, and there's no clear guidelines for them. While they're not at the level of MPs they're also not at the level of local councillors. This is Paul (talk) 17:08, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per WP:OFFICEHOLDER. A police commissioner at this level is unlikely to attract coverage beyond routine spokesbeing reporting, and there's no claim of that in the article. Possibly he could be redirected to the list of officeholders if must but personally I'm not inclined to take AtD as a requirement. Mangoe (talk) 22:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:30, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Looking at sources, which ones provide SIGCOV?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:33, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christine Warnke (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

non-notable, subject has held several local, insiginficant and largely inconsequential appointments. Article reeks of puffery and edits by interested parties Bangabandhu (talk) 19:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Washington, D.C.. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:30, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I corrected one source and did searches online, and found lots of potential sources. The facts check out, for example her alumni award, White House arts commission, Real Estate commissioner for DC, hobnobbing, etc. She’s well known in the lobbying industry in the capital of the United States, and isn’t merely a local celebrity. Oddly, I can’t find a source confirming that she’s on the DNC. Bearian (talk) 11:19, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Alumni award is of no significance, neither is nomination to the real estate commission. She's got invited to some parties and was appointed to a board, all typical of white collar lawyers in DC. No in depth coverage exists in any single article and she's never done anything remarkable enough to merit a profile. She's not on the Democratic National Committee, she has a position on the DC Democratic State Committee, which is about as insignificant a position in local politics as exists. Bangabandhu (talk) 01:30, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, I'd like to hear from more editors on this one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:27, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sonali Phogat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBLP. M S Hassan 📬✍🏻 15:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Politicians, Women, Television, and Haryana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:51, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Significant coverage in reliable sources, including BBC and The Hindu, and bylined articles in other media, indicating her notability as social media personality, politician, or related to her death. She meets the requirements, in my opinion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:56, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Goa. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:59, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:00, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi M S Hassan. Thanks for reviewing this article. However Wikipedia platform is created with principles and articles of public interest which has notability and I feel this article has. Request you to withdraw this notice.Thanks.Gardenkur (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mushy Yank.Thanks Mushy Yank for his opinion.Gardenkur (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – news coverage appears to be only connected to her death. As tragic as that event was, WP:BLPCRIME as well as WP:BLP1E applies. --bonadea contributions talk 11:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 22:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I'm finding the same as bonadea. Here is something more recent that mentions her, but again in the context of her death and without significant biographical coverage. -- asilvering (talk) 20:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I should add that there is limited coverage of her in the context of her striking another politician with a shoe (example), which is also not very useful for WP:GNG, and some routine election coverage (example). So while I think it's plausible that there is solid biographical coverage out there, I don't think we've found it yet. If anyone can turn up an obituary (rather than an article about the circumstances of her death) that might give us something to go on. -- asilvering (talk) 20:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - just from a quick search, appears across all major news media in country, both regarding death and various controversies. --Soman (talk) 00:44, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]