Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rosena Allin-Khan

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. No prejudice against userfication if requested. North America1000 01:17, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rosena Allin-Khan[edit]

Rosena Allin-Khan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable politician; sole claim to fame arises from candidature at the upcoming by-election. RaviC (talk) 16:43, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 17:31, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 17:31, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Candidates for office do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates — if you cannot demonstrate and source that she was already notable enough for a Wikipedia article before being selected as a candidate, then she does not become notable enough for a Wikipedia article until she wins the by-election. But the only other claim of notability here is that she currently serves on one of London's borough councils, which isn't enough (we accept members of the main citywide London Assembly as notable, but not members of every individual borough council within the city.) Delete, without prejudice against recreation on or after election day if she wins. Bearcat (talk) 20:13, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
move to draftspace so we don't lose the edit history. If she wins the bielection then she'll be notable enough, and it's easier to just move it back from there than recreate, which also loses this edit history. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:50, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Administrators have access to a "restore" function, by which a deleted article and its edit history can be undeleted if necessary. The danger in just draftspacing a candidate's BLP, however, is that it would create an undesirable precedent that all candidates could always keep an article in draftspace pending the election results, thus overrunning draftspace with an unmanageable and unmaintainable glut of campaign brochures. So WP:POLOUTCOMES even specifies that in the case of unelected political candidates, we go the "delete, and then allow restoration if they win" route rather than holding onto it in draftspace just in case. Bearcat (talk) 14:01, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the above, seems like deletion is the usual outcome, and if/when she wins the election, admins will be more than happy to restore. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:47, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I agree largely with Bearcat. She doesn't meet notability criteria under WP:BIO or WP:POLITICIAN. Generally, I think that it is also quite important to regard candidates as non-notable to prevent the use of Wikipedia biography articles for campaign purposes. But if she is elected to the House of Commons, the article should be retrieved, because then she would be notable under WP:POLITICIAN as a member of a national legislature. There is also (at least) one precedent, in which case a biography article on a candidate was first deleted and then retrieved after her election (see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siân Gwenllian) --Editor FIN (talk) 11:32, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record, there's actually a lot of precedent for that — if a person wins election to the seat, then their notability claim has gone from "candidate" to "actual officeholder", which is a clean pass of WP:NPOL #1. So yeah, it's not just one case, but rather it's pretty standard practice that the article can be restored on or after election day if they win the seat. Bearcat (talk) 14:01, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Non-notable political wannabe. Softlavender (talk) 11:09, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per WP:NPOL: "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article"." She doesn't, although that will probably change if she wins. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 11:45, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • SNOW Delete and I would've actually also considered PROD. SwisterTwister talk 05:37, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, per Bearcat and WP:NPOL, etc. Please accept my apologies for having started this article! Edwardx (talk) 10:50, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or possibly redirect Article can be restored if she wins the election. White Arabian Filly Neigh 14:34, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Userfy. No point in deleting if she gets elected (the article can then be moved back to this title), and if she doesn't, it can languish harmlessly in userspace. Nyttend (talk) 15:11, 22 May 2016 (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.

Northamerica1000 and Nyttend: She just got elected to Parliament. Therefore I suggest belaying that delete and restoring the original content so the new article doesn't have to be created from scratch. Softlavender (talk) 02:22, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rosena_Allin-Khan&oldid=1089521214"