Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexis Weik


 * 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.  Sandstein  16:59, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Alexis Weik

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Candidate for state senate seat, does not meet NPOL. Prior to state senate run she held a position (receiver of taxes) in the municipal level which is not notable. Eostrix (talk) 14:20, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Eostrix (talk) 14:20, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Eostrix (talk) 14:20, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

The subject is notable. She represents a town of more than 325,000 people, larger than the average State Senate and State Assembly districts in New York. Additionally, she meets Wikipedia's threshold, as she "has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Therefore, "it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." She has been covered in Newsday and the Long Island Advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PoliticsEditz (talk • contribs) 14:58, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * She's not mayor (or Town supervisor in NY parlance). She's Receiver of Taxes (see: Islip, New York, this position is on the municipal ballot but is not a policy making position). Her state senate run has generated some local New York coverage, which is insufficient for notability.--Eostrix (talk) 15:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * She still holds an elected position which represents more people than the average New York State legislative seat. While her position as Receiver of Taxes or her candidacy for New York State Senate may not be sufficient on their own to merit an article, the two together have provided enough notoriety to merit one. There have been several news articles about her since her announcement which meet the threshold for a notable person. Even prior to her run for State Senate, she received coverage for her job as Receiver of Taxes. Regardless of the positions lack of policy making ability, the office still maintains a more elevated position to advocate from, as demonstrated. This person has held an elected position for 9 years, and is now running for an elected position at the state level. That qualifies as notable.PoliticsEditz (talk) 15:35, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Not according to normal Wikipedia standards, she's not presumed notable and the local and election-generated coverage is not sufficient. If she actually gets elected to the state senate, that would make her notable.--Eostrix (talk) 15:38, 17 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete Size is not the only factor that makes somewhere notable. Islip is a huge place, with over 300,000 inhabitants, but it is just an indistinct suburb in the greater New York City area. Also, there is no place where the holder of a non-policy position like receiver of taxes would be default notable. If she wins the election she will be notable, if she does not she will not be. Keep in mind Macomb County, Michigan has around 900,000 inhavbitants, but we are not going to declare the county clerk and county tresurer default notable. Even the county prosecutor who has wide disgretion in who to pursue for cimes is not default notale, although there may be enough sourcing for Carl Marlinga, although as much for his involvement in corruption as his role in government.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:32, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, evidently presentism causes us not to have an article on Marlinga. His successor Eric J. Smith (Michigan politician) does have an article. He also left office due to criminal activities.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:34, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Doug Carl of course shows that you do not have to be a crook to get an article related to Macomb County. Of course, we would probably not have an article on Mr. Carl if I had not created it. The article needs more work, since it fails to mention his run for county office on one occasion.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:36, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Carl is of course default notable because he actually was a state senator. Disctirct size does not matter for state senators because they create law that impacts all the state. So even if they were elected from a 1962 drawn bocket borough in Tennessee or another state that was insanely far from one-man, one-vote they would still be notable. State legislature members though are an extreme case of presentism.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:38, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 08:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment: She is a person of high importance and has a great resumé but fails WP:SIGCOV. This may be helpful. Regards Pesticide1110 (talk) 10:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not meet the notability standards mentioned above.--Mpen320 (talk) 01:50, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Unelected state candidate, non-notable local politician per WP:NPOL, also seems to fail WP:GNG. If she wins the state election we can always recreate it. SportingFlyer  T · C  16:26, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. People do not automatically get articles either for running as candidates in elections they have not yet won or for holding office at the local level, the referencing present here is almost entirely primary sources (raw tables of election results from the county elections office, her own staff profile on the self-published website of her own employer) that are not support for notability at all, and the one reference that is actually to a media outlet is just her initial announcement of her candidacy, which is not enough coverage to get her over WP:GNG all by itself: since every candidate in every election can always show one or two of those, if that were all it took to hand a candidate a GNG-based exemption from having to pass NPOL then every candidate would always get that exemption and nobody would ever actually have to pass NPOL at all anymore. Obviously no prejudice against recreation in November if she wins the state senate seat, since her notability claim will thus have shifted from candidate to officeholder, but nothing here is a legitimate reason for a Wikipedia article to already exist today. Bearcat (talk) 21:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is a case of WP:TOOSOON. If she wins the primary/general elections, then she can have an article. Candidates don't get articles for solely being candidates. Weik is also a non-notable local politician as she holds a low-profile municipal-level post. Islip is certainly a large enough town, yet the current sources in the article are all primary sources. Lefcentreright  Discuss   21:06, 22 June 2020 (UTC)


 * 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.