Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elected transgender officials around the world


 * 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 keep. There's clear consensus here that this should neither be deleted nor merged. There's some support here for renaming, but I don't see a clear consensus on that, so I'll call this NC on a name change. A name change doesn't require AfD involvement, so people can continue to discuss that on the talk page and/or be WP:BOLD. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:48, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Elected transgender officials around the world

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Guess I'll field the unlovely job of sending this to AfD again. - The future of this list was previously discussed here in December (under a capitalized article name), which resulted in a decision to merge to List of the first LGBT holders of political offices. However, nothing in that regard was done since, until the page was entirely redirected there by, stating that a merge was infeasible because this list lacks information about whether or not listed people are first office holders. That didn't stick, either.

Based on the previously closing admin's comments that the notability of the list per se might be defensible, and the apparent infeasibility of a merge, I'd like to open this up for discussion again - because the article clearly either needs to be spruced up, merged, or deleted, but shouldn't remain in its current form. I have no opinion on which solution is best. Elmidae (talk · contribs) 12:35, 20 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I would recommend "sprucing up" is the best alternative to deletion - the list is obviously note-worthy and does not fit nicely in any of the other lists. Gstridsigne (talk) 12:52, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Keep - The proposed merger/redirect is into "First LGBT elected officials." This is a list of ALL Trans elected officials, not just the first. The list is small enough to keep and maintain. Plus, trans folks have different experiences from other members of the LGBTQ community. And with the election of 9 trans folk in 2017 in the US, it is important to keep this list, especially as time goes on. Not to mention, superlatives that would be messy on "First LGBT elected officials" would not be so here. First transman elected, first tranwoman of color, first transman of color, et cetera. That would be quite a mess on the other page, but it works here. It does not break WP:OC, because Trans politicians may and usually do have different perspectives than even other members of the LGBT community - and their identity as trans folks will undoubtedly affect their policies. It does need a head article, but per policy "Please note that this does not mean that the head article must already exist before a category may be created, but that it must at least be reasonable to create one." And it is reasonable that one can and should be created. Gstridsigne (talk) 12:48, 20 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Per the previous decision, the arbiter said that a case could be made for keeping, but needed reliable sources to suggest that trans folk are decidedly different policy wise than other politicians. That was pretty easy to find. Here is an article from the Washington Post which pretty much shows, that yes, trans folk have different experiences and therefore different policy goals. It is obvious, but here is a reliable source that clearly states that. Gstridsigne (talk) 13:04, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  16:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  16:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  16:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  16:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep If transgender politicians are better covered in reliable sources than other politicians then sure if can be sourced, and if being a transgender politician is a rare enough occurance to merit listing, then sure. Prince of Thieves (talk) 16:52, 20 March 2018 (UTC) Striking !vote by blocked sock puppeteer. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk \\ 22:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: As the nominator the first time, I'm not going to cast another vote this time — I still believe that the same issues apply as before, so I don't feel the need to rehash them all. But if this does get kept, the title still needs to be something different than it is (i.e. List of transgender politicians), and the list needs to be organized differently. It should not include non-notable town councillors and school or library board trustees and members of the boards of directors of non-notable organizations, and it should not contain repeated entries for the same person each time they won reelection — it should be restricted to people who have Wikipedia articles to link to, just as the other lists of LGBT people already are due to their frequent misuse as a venue for attack vandalism against non-LGBT people, and it should contain one entry per notable person, not three or four or five repetions of the same person each time they got reelected. Bearcat (talk) 17:56, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with many of your comments Bearcat. The fact that many of the names are repeated when they assumed a new office seems odd. And many of the current names do have articles. But being that 2017 was a watershed year for trans folks being elected to office, perhaps the even the non-note worthy names should be kept in that secion. 9 openly trans folk were elected on one day. That is noteworthy in and of itself. But I agree - it needs some work - but shouldn't be deleted or merged. Gstridsigne (talk) 19:31, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * At a minimum it should only contain bluelinks, and a rename to List of transgender politicians would be wise. I am taking the pruning of non-notable entries as a given when saying keep. Prince of Thieves (talk) 19:40, 20 March 2018 (UTC) — Striking per WP: SOCKSTRIKE. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:41, 24 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment I have been clearing out a backlog at Category:Articles to be merged after an Articles for deletion discussion and my interest in this article came about through that. I have no opinion on the article except to say that if it is kept it needs some better inclusion criteria so only notable people are on it. I do have some other general thoughts though:
 * I stand by the merge being unfeasible. It would require me going through each individual in order to establish whether they were the first. Even doing that the number of minor city officials would completely outweigh the other list and create major WP:undue concerns. There is a reason no one has done anything with this article after 15 months.
 * Redirect was a valid option. A redirect is merely a merge where nothing is fitted. It is like me merging everything into that article and it then being deleted. The alternative would have been me completely messing up the other article. Believe me I have done hundreds of AFD merges and redirecting is the best option in over half of them.
 * This is the wrong way to overturn an AFD. It should have gone to WP:Deletion review. It is here now and editors have responded so it may as well stay. I will ping the participants from the previous AFD though..
 * Editors !voting merge without thinking of the practical consequences of the merge is a common problem here, one I am looking to address (see User talk:Atsme/MR). For a similar example see Deletion review/Log/2018 March 20 for an old AFD that I put up for deletion review due to the impracticality of a merge.
 * In conclusion I have no opinion on whether this is kept or deleted. But please do not merge it. AIRcorn (talk) 20:14, 20 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep and fix. An important list, it seems to me. Carrite (talk) 02:43, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, rename, and fix. --Enos733 (talk) 04:35, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't care what happens to the article, but the list is definitely a notable and sourceable one. SportingFlyer  talk  05:22, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - as long as in the data is somewhere on Wikipedia, does it matter where it is? Bearian (talk) 00:00, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Provided that common sense, logic, reason and policy is followed, it does not matter where it is. Prince of Thieves (talk) 00:05, 22 March 2018 (UTC) — Striking per WP: SOCKSTRIKE. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:41, 24 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment I have went through the list and made a few adjustments. I have deleted repeated entries and consolidated entries where they were appropriate. I added a few citations, and added a lead to the article detailing why this list can be differentiated from other lists like "First LGBT politicians." I also deleted individuals whom I could not verify were trans, like Anne Graham of Redmond Oregon, and others who seemed not noteworty like Racheal Luckey who was elected to a neighborhood council. I also added a comment on the election in 2017. Obviously, these are necessary changes but there still exists more work to be done on the list. I would suggest removing some of the tabs - and I will be introducing an infobox to link it to the Transgender series. I also encourage others to make changes. Gstridsigne (talk) 15:51, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename, Notable topic for a list; probably to List of transgender politicians. Reywas92Talk 07:59, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep and support the rename suggestion to List of transgender politicians. Rab V (talk) 22:21, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I would support the renaming to List of transgender politicians. Gstridsigne (talk) 02:41, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Rename to List of transgender politicians. The article is a complete disaster content-wise.  Some form of inclusion criteria will be established, as not every school board member should be listed in an encyclopedia.  But that debate is for the talk page, not here. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 04:05, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Being that, even WITH school board members, the total of trans officials in the US numbers less then 30, it seems reasonable and noteworthy to keep them. The highest office a trans individual has held is in the DoD - but that was an appointed position. Danica Roem and Althea Garrison currently hold the title of trans person in highest elected office, and as far as trans men, the highest attainment achieved is City Councilperson by Phillipe Cunningham. So, yes, even elected school board members seem noteworthy - only 3 transmen have been elected ever, 2 of them school board members. But of course, as you said, that is an issue for the talkpage, not here. Gstridsigne (talk) 20:26, 27 March 2018 (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.