Talk:Jane Raybould

Notability tag removal?
Should the Notability tag be removed at this point as the article has expanded and the page is about an incumbent and relevant Nebraska politician? I believe it should, but am unsure whether or not to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redditaddict69 (talk • contribs) 04:45, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Campaign funding
Should there be an entry on funds available and what the candidate has said about her funding?

The entry on the senate race is so neutral it gives virtually no information. Tero111 (talk) 02:20, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Underdog grassroots campaign and the chances of a Democrat in Nebraska in the Trump era
Lincoln has the large student population and the local college paper has discussed her chances.

http://www.dailynebraskan.com/opinion/edwards-newcomer-jane-raybould-would-make-good-senator-probably-won/article_e7a90bcc-8d2a-11e7-b1f6-abe901701a06.html

Tero111 (talk) 20:45, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

What are the campaign issues?
Raybold has stated that Deb Fischer has voted on party lines "98% of the time" (campaign speech in Lincoln)

She has stated she opposes the Republican healthcare approach. Deb Fischer voted to remove Obamacare. perhaps it is stated more clearly in her website, but she intends to do something. OK, she says this: "American citizens have a right to affordable, comprehensive health care, but our system is broken. More than 100,000 Nebraskans use the Affordable Care Act for their medical coverage, but some aspects of the law as written, are not fit for Nebraska families, farmers and senior citizens. The bottom line is this: Hard-working Nebraskans should not have to choose between putting food on the table or paying for insurance for their families. We need to mend, not end, the Affordable Care Act with a replacement solution that works for Nebraska families, farmers and seniors."

Please condense that to a few lines.

She also supports public schools fully.

Tero111 (talk) 22:23, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * All of these things you're discussing are relevant for United States Senate election in Nebraska, 2018, not this article. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:38, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Well, add it there then. I am unwilling to type up edits that usually get deleted. Just bringing up the added relevance. That article is not in danger of being removed, this one is. I am not the author of either article. Tero111 (talk) 11:29, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Sleeper candidate
A sleeper candidate is notable till election

The Hill article discusses these issues.

http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/384103-meet-the-democratic-sleeper-candidate-gunning-for-senate-in-nebraska

I don't edit references as I get the format wrong somehow. Tero111 (talk) 14:40, 1 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Added section to display status as sleeper candidate using that article. -article creator Redditaddict69 (talk) 23:31, 10 July 2018 (UTC)Redditaddict69

Deletion review?
Many votes in this article's deletion discussion are for a keep (more so, anything but a delete) and seems to think that the article should be restored (he did it himself, but I undid it). So, if anyone wants to put this into WP:Deletion review, I support it going there. I will, however, abstain from voting at a DR given that I created the article and personally don't think it should be recreated. The consensus may end up being overwhelmingly to overturn this deletion.

Before anyone puts this at DR, here are a few AfDs of candidates to look at to give perspective at what determines notability per WP:POLOUTCOMES and/or WP:NPOL:
 * Articles for deletion/Lois Combs Weinberg
 * Articles for deletion/Wayne Sowell
 * Articles for deletion/Dwight Grotberg
 * Articles for deletion/Allen Buckley
 * Articles for deletion/Jean Hay Bright
 * Articles for deletion/Bob Henry Baber
 * Articles for deletion/Kathleen Sullivan Alioto
 * Articles for deletion/Bill Lee (Tennessee politician)
 * Articles for deletion/Rebekah Kennedy
 * Articles for deletion/Shawn Moody
 * Articles for deletion/Joe Manchik
 * Articles for deletion/Danny O'Connor (Ohio politician)
 * Articles for deletion/Ben Clayburgh
 * Articles for deletion/Christopher Reed
 * Articles for deletion/Tony Campbell (Maryland politician)
 * Articles for deletion/Eliot Cutler
 * Articles for deletion/Robert Kelleher
 * Articles for deletion/Richard Ziser
 * Articles for deletion/Bob Tuke

Redditaddict69 (talk) (contribs)  14:15, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

I would vote for a review and to resurrect the page. The deletion discussion did not address the fact that Jane Raybould was also the Democratic candidate for Lt. Governor in Nebraska's 2014 election. SubirGrewal (talk) 16:49, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Lt. Gov. candidates are not any more notable than Senate candidates. It was redirected to the Senate election because she is more widely known for that (2018 Senate races are far more analyzed today than 2014 Lt. Gov candidacies). Plus, she received almost no individual media attention for the 2014 candidacy. If you feel like what I said doesn't cover everything, feel free to begin a deletion review. Redditaddict69 (talk) (contribs)  19:58, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
 * That is an inconsistent standard, inconsistently applied. For example, Gary Trauner, the Senate candidate in Wyoming does have a page. He's made two unsuccessful runs for congress.
 * and the page was AfDed for that reason. The result was No Consensus, though I agree it should be deleted or redirected after this year's Senate election (I'd revisit in in about 2 weeks, but because the AfD was only a few months ago, it shouldn't be so soon). You can always AfD it if you want. Redditaddict69 (talk) (contribs)  03:37, 27 October 2018 (UTC)


 * "Candidates" are notable if they pass WP:GNG. They're not notable if they don't. They're notable by WP:NPOL if they win, and election day is on November 6, so how about we wait for the elections to determine who's automatically notable as a winner, if anyone on that list, and they consider deletion review on November 7? – Muboshgu (talk) 03:58, 27 October 2018 (UTC)