Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colia Clark


 * 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   redirect to United States Senate election in New York, 2012. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:05, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Colia Clark

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Nomination on the grounds that the subject does not meet the general notability guideline. Clark was a minor party candidate for the Senate 2010, winning only 1% of the vote. None of her activism work in women's rights or civil rights is especially notable. WP:BEFORE is satisfied; searching for sources hits the usual candidacy pages, facebooks, etc... When limited to the news, she receives trivial coverage in the Times Union and a HuffPo blog, as well as a Green Party press release, all of which are insufficient in establishing notability. Tarc (talk) 13:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:47, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect- To United States Senate election in New York, 2012, where she is already appropriately mentioned; readers deserve to be sent to the current election. Dru of Id (talk) 02:27, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * IMO I'd rather see it deleted outright. If it was a candidate from a major party or at least a 3rd party that saw significant electoral support I would go for a redirect.  But in her only run to date, this person garnered 1% of the vote.  There has to be a threshold for what a fringe candidate is, and IMO this is it. Tarc (talk) 13:10, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * If it's deleted, readers get to go to a page that shows it's been deleted; industrious ones then have to wade through one of these, and the butterflies and Montgomery are irrelevent (to her, the Green Party, and the election, just to clarify). Anyone currently searching is most likely to be doing so in the context of the current election. Sending them is cheap. Dru of Id (talk) 02:53, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect to United States Senate election in New York, 2012 - The Bushranger One ping only 00:19, 15 June 2012 (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.