Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tasha Williamson (2nd nomination)

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. Missvain (talk) 01:40, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tasha Williamson[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)

Unsuccessful municipal candidate fails WP:NPOL. Page is only sourced to hyper-local publications. KidAd talk 06:31, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:30, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:30, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:30, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Oaktree b (talk) 21:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep on the grounds of significant coverage for general notability. Weak keep at least. Trillfendi (talk) 00:39, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom -- CharlesShirley (talk) 04:26, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NPOL Serv181920 (talk) 10:54, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable enough locally, and well supported by reliable sources. A good encyclopedia article.--Concertmusic (talk) 23:33, 14 December 2020 (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.