Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anita Vandenbeld

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. postdlf (talk) 05:46, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anita Vandenbeld[edit]

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

Yet another in the eternal line of unelected candidates in the current Canadian federal election, who has no properly sourced indication of notability for anything besides being an unelected candidate (which, per WP:POLITICIAN, is not a valid claim of notability.) She can certainly come back if he wins, but she's not entitled to use Wikipedia as a campaign tool in the meantime. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 06:05, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - There do not appear to be adequate sources that are both about the subject and independent of it. VQuakr (talk) 06:46, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:27, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:28, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - If she ever does become a Member of Parliament or is elected to a notable office only then would an article would be neccessary. We can't have articles on every candidate in every riding it is unneccessary. Aaaccc (talk), 7 April 2011 (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.