Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ellenor Bland


 * 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. Secret account 17:56, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Ellenor Bland

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a person who held a position as a member of a local council and ran unsuccessfully for higher office, and held very minor positions in a party structure. Nothing about her raises to the level of notability. John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:26, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:39, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:39, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

*Keep - Depth of media coverage is sufficient to satisfy WP:GNG. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:42, 2 August 2014 (UTC) 
 * Keep. She was a well-known British politician who was the subject of an international furor in 2006 after her anti-Pakistani racist writings became public.  She passes WP:GNG based on extensive, in-depth coverage from worldwide major media outlets (and even some elsewhere), including (1) this from the Hindustan Times, (2) this from the Chicago Tribune, (3) this, (4) this and (5) this from The Times, (6) this and (7) this from The Guardian, (8) this from the BBC, (9) this from the Daily Mail (10) this from The Independent, (11) this from the London Evening Standard, (12) this from the Wiltshire Times, (13) this from the Daily Mirror, (14) this from the Orlando Sentinel, (15) this from Dawn in Pakistan, (16) this from The Scotsman, and (17) this from The Spectator. Cbl62 (talk) 16:32, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Jim-Siduri (talk) 04:39, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Sufficient refs for her deeds. Keep the refs needed tag on. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 16:42, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Probably infamous rather than famous but notable due to the media coverage during the racism allegations. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 21:11, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete -- clearly fails WP:POLITICIAN. A Town council is only a Parish Council.  However notorious and widely reported her views, her fame arises only from one incident. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:39, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete -- No evidence of notability: neither as important politician, nor public attraction for any oother reason. Racist accident is irrelevant per WP:SINGLEEVENT Staszek Lem (talk) 04:06, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 16:41, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. WP:SINGLEEVENT was not intended to apply in a situation like this.  This is not a case where an individual played a small or peripheral role in a noteworthy event.  That's where the guideline is intended to apply.  This is a situation where Ms. Bland was herself the subject of note, based on her racist writings.  This was not a minor, localized incident.  It was a major controversy that drew international condemnation and attention in the world's leading publications.  WP:SINGLEEVENT states: "When an individual is significant for his or her role in a single event, it may be unclear whether an article should be written about the individual, the event or both"  Here, there is no separate article on the "Ellenor Bland racism controversy," nor do I think there should be.  The appropriate manner in which to deal with this notable subject is in the article on Bland.  Deleting the topic altogether is whitewashing Wikipedia of a significant racist controversy. Cbl62 (talk) 17:00, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, I intend to apply it like this. A minor politician is a racist. Big deal. Lots of closet racists there are. Suddenly it hits headlines. Lots of noise. Because of single accident, dirt digging starts. Still a single, however spread in time, event, with no major consequences for history or politics.  Staszek Lem (talk) 17:10, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Your intent and desire to apply it in this manner are not what's relevant. The policy is what's relevant.  The Ellenor Bland controversy was not, as you put it, not a "big deal."  This was a major controversy that is part of an important topic.  Deleting it would be a whitewash. Cbl62 (talk) 17:15, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Yep. you say it yourself: "controversy", i.e., single event. And my "not a big deal" is not about her. It is about all these local racists who go unnoticed by major media. This one was out of luck and got herself into a big deal. 17:29, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * NOTE: Staszek has now excised the article of the entire section dealing with the racism controversy. Talk about white-washing!  Cbl62 (talk) 17:18, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I strongly suggest you to read our policy about bios of living persons careflly before jumping with accusations. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete- There are many sources, but they are all relating to the same event. There is no other coverage.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 19:18, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete A classic WP:BLP1E. § FreeRangeFrog croak 19:52, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:POLTICIAN, classic WP:BLP. Local councillor says/writes something stupid and/or a bit racist is a bit of WP:DOGBITESMAN story, and such stories are WP:ROUTINEly used by the press (in this case an unholy alliance of the British left-wing press and the Pakistani right-wing press) to stir up their readers into indignant frenzies as they know they'll get clicks.   Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:45, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - the sourcing is indicative: her earlier uneventful and non-notable career is completely un-sourced, the racism allegations are extensively sourced and her suspension from the party directly relates to the racism allegations. Show me in-depth, significant coverage of her not prompted by that one event and we'll talk.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 00:47, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. A minor politician who holds a role that wouldn't get her past WP:NPOL does not suddenly become appropriate for inclusion in an international encyclopedia just because a single incident in her career suddenly garners more coverage than usual, following which she drops back into uncovered obscurity. WP:BLP1E does apply in situations like this, actually — if she wasn't already notable enough for an article before her racist comments were publicized then she's not notable enough for an article because of them either. Bearcat (talk) 03:50, 12 August 2014 (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.