Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joan A. Lambert

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 speedy keep‎. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Hey man im josh (talk) 14:57, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Joan A. Lambert[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

~~I can not find any sources to indicate that this person passes GNG. I'm not super familiar with notability standards for politicians but I don't think simply being elected is enough.~~ ★Trekker (talk) 17:38, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, California, and Nevada. ★Trekker (talk) 17:38, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete State assembly position with no other references to notability in career. A MINOTAUR (talk) 17:46, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. From WP:NPOL: The following are presumed to be notable: ...or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:48, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- A presumtion needs to be followed up with sources that back up the assumption tho, I've looked a fair bit but I couldn't find any sources that are about Lambert.★Trekker (talk) 17:52, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  Notability is presumed for state legislators because the prominence and public nature of the position inevitably results in substantial coverage. That is borne out by a quick search: Newspapers.com has over 500 results with reasonable filters (Nevada, 1980 to present), most of which seem to be for the subject of this article, and at least several of which constitute substantial coverage. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:07, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - I stand corrected then, I was not able to see those source when searching. I will withdraw my nomination.★Trekker (talk) 19:07, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:11, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes NPOL. Mccapra (talk) 18:29, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn by nominator.★Trekker (talk) 19:07, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is POSSIBLY a BLP without good citations! Someone needs to adopt and clean this if possible. SportingFlyer T·C 20:44, 17 August 2023 (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.