Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cath Bowtell

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 redirect to Division of Melbourne. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cath Bowtell[edit]

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

Appears to fail WP:POLITICIAN based on the bio linked to on the campaign website or official ALP site (candidates fail the notability criteria for politicians unless they meet the general notability criteria). This is a recently created article, so raising for discussion as there may be other reasons for possible notability that I may have missed in searching through Google News. Fæ (talk) 07:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Fæ (talk) 07:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- Fæ (talk) 07:14, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there is already an article at the incubator here that the content can be merged with if necessary. Clearly fails WP:POLITICIAN at the moment; may not in a month, but notability is not transient. A discussion here decided that in this situation the relevant material could be moved to the incubator, where material that could be useful for an article could be kept and worked on, but the article cannot stay in the mainspace because at this time she doesn't qualify. Frickeg (talk) 07:20, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet WP:POLITICIAN and given the electorate, she may not even be able to meet after the election. No independent sources provided. Wikipedia is not an election guide. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 07:40, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Division of Melbourne or delete. WP:POLITICIAN says, sensibly in my view, that the "general rule" for candidates is a redirection to the relevant constituency or election page. The subject of this article is not notable for anything other than this candidacy. As Frickeg points out, the relevant wikiproject formed a consensus about the way these articles should be dealt with. A wikiproject can't bind an AfD but here it is a sensible outcome that implements WP:POLITICIAN in a practical manner. If we incubate the article it will be ready to roll if and when she wins. But for now, it is premature for the article to be on the mainspace.--Mkativerata (talk) 07:56, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is an article being used to promote a political campaign, which is a violation of policy, requiring that articles are not to be used as a means of promotion. Cindamuse (talk) 15:51, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:31, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Division of Melbourne, as above. Bowtell is not a shoo-in to be elected, but if she is the article can always be reverted back away from being a redirect. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 23:34, 7 August 2010 (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.