Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angela Jones-Evans


 * 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. Big Dom  20:14, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Angela Jones-Evans

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Political candidate yet to be elected and currently fails WP:POLITICIAN article may be recreated if and when she is elected. Paste Let’s have a chat. 20:35, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree. Even if she was running for a seat in the House of Commons, she still wouldn't be automatic. Mandsford 21:12, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete (or redirect to National Assembly for Wales election, 2011). I do not see notability apart from being a candidate. User is posting a string of articles about Conservative party candidates for this election, but WP:POLITICIAN is there expressly to prevent this sort of use of Wikipedia as an election noticeboard. JohnCD (talk) 23:13, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:43, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:43, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:43, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per past outcomes interpreting our guidelines on politicians. In this case, a candidate for the House of Commmons is not notable, absent outside notoriety. If you can convince me that her business activites as a businesswoman are notable, then I will change my mind. Bearian (talk) 17:58, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a major party candidate so it should be allowed. It's not like the candidate is representing an obscure party.  If this doesn't meet the criteria, the criteria are flawed.  Let's be reasonable.  Maybe break a few rules. Suzukix (talk) 04:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Can you imagine how many articles there would be if we decided that any "major party candidate" who was running, or had ever run, for any national (or, in this case) subnational political office was entitled to their own article? It's bad enough that we have automatic pages for persons who have won an election to serve as state or provincial legislators, and in that respect, I think the criteria are flawed, but those are the rules.  We're not the host site for the Conservative Party, nor for Labour, nor the GOP, the Democratic, the Social Democrats, Christian Socialists, etc.  Mandsford 13:33, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete I do occasionally see someone try to argue that "major party candidates should be notable", but that's not policy and most Wikipedians don't agree with it. Count me in the latter group. Simply running for office does not make a person notable. Indeed, if the incumbent is thoroughly entrenched, sometimes only a nobody is willing to run against him/her! --MelanieN (talk) 02:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete no real coverage outside of running for political position, that in itself does not make one notable. LibStar (talk) 10:58, 16 March 2011 (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.