Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erin Schrode

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:18, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Erin Schrode

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

Fails WP:NPOL and WP:BASIC. Sources online mainly stem from her unsuccessful candidacy for elected office. Kurykh (talk) 05:54, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. FITINDIA (talk) 08:50, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Sources aren't reliable either regarding her failed running for office that failed GNG and POLITICIAN. KGirlTrucker81^{huh? what I've been doing} 09:12, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: @KGirlTrucker81: Psst, Erin Schrode is a woman. --Kurykh (talk) 18:32, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kurykh: Oh, I almost forgot about it, there I correct it. Even teen girls don't know what their gender when identifying persons lol. KGirlTrucker81^{huh? what I've been doing} 18:45, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:17, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. People do not get Wikipedia articles just for being unsuccessful candidates for political office — if you cannot demonstrate and properly source that she was already eligible for a Wikipedia article for some other reason besides her candidacy, then she has to win the election, not just run in it, to get a Wikipedia article because election. But this article, as written and sourced, fails to demonstrate that she had the preexisting notability needed to qualify for an article apart from her candidacy — almost all of the sourcing is in the candidacy context itself and thus falls under WP:ROUTINE, and the only sources that predate that are two blogs and a blurb in a listicle. So she doesn't get an article because candidate, and the sourcing here is not adequate to get her an article because Thinking Green. Bearcat (talk) 18:02, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:53, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Schrode is a failed congressional candidate and thus non-notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:24, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - doesn't meet WP:GNG. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 19:41, 20 April 2017 (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.