Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Samorajczyk


 * 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 03:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Barbara Samorajczyk

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete: utterly non-notable politician. Quis separabit? 17:20, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 01:36, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 01:36, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Weak delete - normally, we delete or merge such articles, but she's more borderline than most I've seen at AfD. This is subject to re-creation or a keep if somebody can come up with better sourcing or she wins higher office. Bearian (talk) 18:26, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Strong KEEP Why now?  Jim Webb is running for president and readers will want to read about his wives and the mother of his children.  It is premature to delete her WP article now when it can come up for deletion later. Just my humble opinion. -- AstroU (talk) 13:45, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 04:02, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * County councillors do not get automatic inclusion rights on Wikipedia just because they were county councillors, and wives of politicians don't inherit notability just for being wives. She certainly might qualify for an article if she could be reliably sourced enough to pass WP:GNG, but the only source in this entire article is a raw table of election results. So nothing here makes her eligible to keep an article as things stand right now — and "readers will want to read about his wives and the mother of his children" doesn't hold any weight as a Wikipedia inclusion criterion if the sourcing isn't there to properly support an article. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 20:20, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - notability is not inherited or transferred. It is also not temporary, so why now simply does not apply, fails WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 14:13, 27 August 2015 (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.