Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sharon Labchuk

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 of the debate was keep. Mind matrix 15:40, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sharon Labchuk[edit]

Delete. Non-notable candidate in election. --GrantNeufeld 19:21, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Merely being a candidate does not satisfy WP:BIO, unless other information can be added to the article to show that she is notable for other reasons. I just don't buy the argument that any credible candidate merits an article. Skeezix1000 19:53, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, wikipedia users deserve to be able to read about any credible candidate. Kappa 23:09, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The current consensus on unelected candidates permits a merged page for "X Party's candidates in Y election". This does create its own set of problems, but unless you're prepared to take on the job of proposing an alternate policy, established consensus stands as the final word whether you like it or not. Merge to Green Party candidates, 2004 Canadian federal election. Bearcat 23:39, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Where is this consensus defined. I've read the ongoing debate but my take from reading it, was that consensus had not been reached. It looked to me like the debate died before consensus was reached, and a vote is still pending. Is there another discussion that I've missed? Nfitz 00:48, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I'm a little concerned. This article was written 10 months ago, summarizing her results in the previous general election. I'm not sure why there is a move to delete the article, just after the new election is called. Why was this not done months ago? She had a decent result in the last election, and is running again. The election aside, she is notable. She's referenced no less than 31 times at the CBC's website with many quotes! Nfitz 00:48, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. In my round-up of candidate articles today, I was trying to avoid articles that had been around prior to the current election. I must have forgotten to check the history when looking at this one. In any case, there's no information in this article that's not already in the Results of the Canadian federal election, 2004: Quebec and Atlantic Canada article. There remains nothing to indicate notability beyond having run in an election (which I have seen cited in numerous other places as insufficient to merit inclusion in Wikipedia). --GrantNeufeld 04:15, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Kappa. --File:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 02:32, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the main runner-up in a person against person election. Consider merging with the list of Green Party candidates if the article cannot be expanded further. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:35, 21 December 2005 (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.