Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heidi Alexander

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. May be restored (but would need a throrough rewrite) if she becomes notable e.g. as an MP. Sandstein 07:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heidi Alexander[edit]

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

Non-notable per WP:POLITICIAN, unreferenced, no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources. Prod contested by creator. MuffledThud (talk) 00:28, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. —MuffledThud (talk) 00:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. —MuffledThud (talk) 00:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There is no reference. Rirunmot (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:54, 30 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Weak Keep, she's the deputy mayor, and there does appear to be quite a bit of coverage referencing her. It should be possible to come up with a somewhat decent article from that, I think. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 07:09, 30 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Borderline Keep. I'm not so convinced by the coverage myself, but she has been selected in a Labour safe seat which is close to a de facto election as an MP. Combined with being deputy mayor of the borough, I'd say this scrapes it - just. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 10:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment WP:POLITICIAN doesn't consider all mayors to be notable, let alone deputy mayors. Just being selected for a safe seat doesn't qualify there either, so perhaps this could be userfied until the subject is elected to a notable post. MuffledThud (talk) 11:01, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as although the subject is mentioned in several available news articles, she is only brought up in passing and not as a main focus. Quantumobserver (talk) 00:07, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Plainly a vanity page: "She believes in equality, fairness wants everyone to have equal chances". I could only find a single local newspaper article actually about her. Wikipedia should not fill up with local councillors and PPCs. As for it being a safe seat, who knows with Labour's polling, and it was a Tory seat in 1987. Fences&Windows 00:22, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. An unreferenced vanity page that fails WP:POLITICIAN. If she gets elected at the next General Election, she qualifies. If the Mayor keels over and she gets promoted, she probably qualifies - but not yet. --Saalstin (talk) 00:35, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- at leat until after the 2010 General Election. She is Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for the Labour Party for a safe labour seat. This means that after the election, she is likely to becomne notable. If we delete this article now, it will have to be re-created after the election. We can delete it after the election if she loses. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:21, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - doesn't appear to satisfy WP:POLITICIAN; wouldn't oppose recreation when/if she meets it in the future, but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Cocytus [»talk«] 22:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:POLITICIAN. Snappy (talk) 12:42, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as this person does not satisfy WP:POLITICIAN right now. JBsupreme (talk) 07:48, 6 January 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.