Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kirsty Finlayson
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- 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 delete. RL0919 (talk) 03:21, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Kirsty Finlayson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subject is a politician who contested several seat but no indication of holding any political national position. Sources provided are either primary or about her candidacy. Article written is more toward to promote/advertise her candidacy for 12 December 2019 United Kingdom general election. Fails WP:NPOL. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:21, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:21, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:21, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Keep She is contesting the Parliamentary seat Oldham West & Royton for the Conservative Party. I would personally argue that any candidate for the main parties in the general election is automatically notable, although some might differ. I tried to include as much information as I could on her. I don't understand how the tone is supporting her candidacy: the language seems neutral to me. I am prepared to compromise and let certain parts be deleted if the source is considered too primary, but I'd argue that deleting the article all together is disproportionate given that the general election is very important in the UK. Epa101 (talk) 06:55, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Comment - Epa101 Greetings. Being candidate do not get Wikipedia page automatically irregardless of how important the election is. A person has to win the election and thereby hold the office to claim notability as a politician. To have a non elected politician in Wikipedia is like having well-known, heavy traffic platform to promote/advertise the political campaign for the candidates which is WP:What Wikipedia is not. Page can be recreated when the ballot is counted and "if" the candidates is elected, passing WP:NPOL notability and not before. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 07:27, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Hello CASSIOPEIA. It doesn't look as if I'm going to win this. I'll take a copy of the page, just in case she gets elected. As an aside, it doesn't seem very fair to me that the incumbent gets to have a Wikipedia page and other candidates seeking election so not. That doesn't seem consistent with Wikipedia's political neutrality to me, as it is likely to favour the incumbent. I know that this is not the place for such discussions though. Thanks for your time. Epa101 (talk) 11:37, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Articles for Deletion should not be seen as wining or losing, but as a space to make reasoned arguments about how a subject does or does not meet the standards for notability. And, I will say, your position is not unique and is often articulated. The challenge with candidates running for office is multiple (does a campaign fall under WP:BLP1E, is campaign coverage run of the mill, do/should we treat all candidates equally (or do we privilege candidates who are members of certain parties or are more likely to win), and is the person really (and permanently) notable (should a failed candidate always be known as public figure or are they low profile individuals), and what about candidates who lose in primary elections (perhaps US specific). Often, we create redirects to a page about the campaign, where certain biographical and campaign issues can exist. In practice, I find it tough to ensure a neutral point of view in candidate pages and there is a tendency to turn a subject's page into a campaign brochure (listing endorsements and policy positions, perhaps sourced only to the campaign's website. While vandalism protection and other reviews occur on pages with lots of visitors, some of these lower profile races do not get the same attention (and vandalism and other violations can sit unnoticed for long stretches of time). --Enos733 (talk) 06:18, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
- Comment I have obviously lost this argument, so I think that it's time for this article to be deleted. If I may make a final point, I feel that the current policy simply cannot be enforced fairly and evenly. Politics is always hard to be objective on. There is a category Category:British political candidates. If I just click on a few links, I cannot see how Beki Adam, Shahrar Ali, Captain Beany, Jane Birdwood, Bill Boaks or Lord Buckethead meet the criteria as outlined. I suggest that Kirsty Finlayson is just as notable as these people. If this policy is up for discussion any time soon, I shall vote to change it. It's impossible to apply the current policy consistently, and that opens the way to political bias. Epa101 (talk) 21:30, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
- Articles for Deletion should not be seen as wining or losing, but as a space to make reasoned arguments about how a subject does or does not meet the standards for notability. And, I will say, your position is not unique and is often articulated. The challenge with candidates running for office is multiple (does a campaign fall under WP:BLP1E, is campaign coverage run of the mill, do/should we treat all candidates equally (or do we privilege candidates who are members of certain parties or are more likely to win), and is the person really (and permanently) notable (should a failed candidate always be known as public figure or are they low profile individuals), and what about candidates who lose in primary elections (perhaps US specific). Often, we create redirects to a page about the campaign, where certain biographical and campaign issues can exist. In practice, I find it tough to ensure a neutral point of view in candidate pages and there is a tendency to turn a subject's page into a campaign brochure (listing endorsements and policy positions, perhaps sourced only to the campaign's website. While vandalism protection and other reviews occur on pages with lots of visitors, some of these lower profile races do not get the same attention (and vandalism and other violations can sit unnoticed for long stretches of time). --Enos733 (talk) 06:18, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
- Keep She is contesting the Parliamentary seat Oldham West & Royton for the Conservative Party. I would personally argue that any candidate for the main parties in the general election is automatically notable, although some might differ. I tried to include as much information as I could on her. I don't understand how the tone is supporting her candidacy: the language seems neutral to me. I am prepared to compromise and let certain parts be deleted if the source is considered too primary, but I'd argue that deleting the article all together is disproportionate given that the general election is very important in the UK. Epa101 (talk) 06:55, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Fails WP:NPOL. Coverage cited is trivial or WP:ROUTINE. Bondegezou (talk) 08:20, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Delete:The subject's political career to date fails WP:NPOL, falling under the specific note that "being ... an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline". As to whether there is evidence that the subject meets WP:GNG, the authorship of an item published by 24plusnews.co.uk is a primary source, and being quoted in passing in a BBC News item on dating apps is non-notable. AllyD (talk) 10:30, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:NPOL. Wikipedia is not an info site for candidates in upcoming elections and usually the current incumbent didn't have an article until after winning the election anyway, so it's actually incredibly neutral. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:33, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
- Delete, does not meet WP:NPOL, political candidates are not inherently wikinotable. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Contesting a seat will never make a person notable. Why would it. People contest seats for all sorts weird and wonderful reasons but only if they win it, will it pass the politician notability policy. Fails WP:NPOL. No stand-alone to pass WP:BIO. scope_creepTalk 10:41, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
- Delete. We have a longstanding consensus that people are not permanently notable enough for Wikipedia just for running as candidates in elections they have not won. In the current UK election alone, there appear to be between 2,500 and 3,000 people running as candidates — by far the majority of whom will not win their seats, and thus will be of no further interest to our readers 48 hours after the election is over — but now add to that the next elections for Stormont, Holyrood, the Senedd, the Canadian election that just finished a few weeks ago, the US Congressional election next year, France, Germany, Australia, Poland and every other country on earth that has democratic elections, and it'll become clear how utterly unsustainable it would be to even try to maintain an article about every non-winning candidate in every election. We are not an advertising platform for aspiring politicians to promote their campaigns — we are an encyclopedia, and our notability standard for politicians is holding office, not just running for it. Obviously she'll qualify for an article after election day if she wins the seat, since her notability claim will have changed to one where an article is required, but simply being a candidate is not enough to already earn her an article today. Bearcat (talk) 22:28, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- Delete - being a parliamentary candidate is not in itself a sign of notability and there is no sign in the article of the subject meeting notability standards for any other reason. If the subject of the article is elected as a Member of Parliament then the article should of course be recreated, but there is no reason for there to be an article for the moment. Dunarc (talk) 23:52, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
- 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.