Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barinder Rasode

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. MBisanz ^talk 19:03, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Barinder Rasode

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

Insufficient notability requirements as per WP:Politician. A municipal councillor and then an unsuccessful candidate for mayor is insufficient for a standalone biography article. She has received press coverage but not as significant in multiple in-depth sources as described by WP:BIO quotation (also read the details in the footnote in that section):

Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article".

Canuckle (talk) 22:04, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:12, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:12, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Surrey is not an internationally famous global city, so its city councillors are not automatically notable just because they exist (the fact that Vancouver gets the global city pass does not hand a notability freebie to Vancouver's suburbs) — rather, Surrey is in the class of cities where a city councillor gets an article only if she can be solidly and reliably sourced as significantly more notable than the norm to a readership that extends beyond Surrey alone. But the sourcing here doesn't do that; nearly half of it is primary sourcing to press releases from non-media organizations and the city's own website, and the half that is media coverage is split between purely WP:ROUTINE local coverage of the type that every city councillor in every city on the planet always gets because covering local politics is the local media's job, and glancing namechecks of her existence in non-localized coverage of Surrey politics that isn't about her. This is not how a city councillor in a non-global city gets a Wikipedia article. If the Globe and Mail and National Post sources were about her, then there'd be a case for inclusion — but they just mention her name in passing while being about something or someone else, and that's not enough to make her more notable than the norm for a city councillor. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 17:23, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Surrey is not significant enough to make city councilors default notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:54, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- a non-notable local politician. Coverage does not suggest notability. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:46, 6 August 2016 (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.