Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evangeline Beechler


 * 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. Clear consensus to delete. Only keep !vote is misreading WP:NPOL in an overbroad manner. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:29, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Evangeline Beechler

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Discovered this article since the other Idaho Democratic Party chair is up for deletion as well. Chairs of political parties at the state level aren't automatically notable under WP:NPOL, and the only coverage I can find on her not in the article is about her failed city council race (for a town where councillors would not be presumed notable), so also fails WP:GNG. SportingFlyer  T · C  00:12, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. SportingFlyer  T · C  00:12, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Idaho-related deletion discussions. SportingFlyer  T · C  00:12, 9 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Seems to be a part of a coordinated deletion attempt, made minutes after Fred Cornforth was nominated. As I said there, per WP:NPOL, "The following are presumed to be notable: Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office. As the chair of a major party at the state-wide level, this individual meets WP:NPOL. KidAd  •  SPEAK  00:18, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Not coordinated - I discovered the article when I saw the other article up for AfD and did a before search for her. She never held a position that qualified for WP:NPOL. SportingFlyer  T · C  00:22, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Politicians and judges who have held state/province–wide office, per WP:NPOL. The Idaho Democratic Party is state-wide. She is the chair of it. KidAd  •  SPEAK  00:33, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I think "state/provincial-wide office" should be interpreted as a position at the state/province itself like governor, secretary of state, or member of a legislative assembly and does not include state-wide positions solely within a party. - Tristan Surtel (talk) 07:25, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * That is my understanding as well. Someone who holds political office at a state level has either been elected or appointed and directly serves constituents, being the leader of a state party is just a job. SportingFlyer  T · C  11:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:55, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * being the leader of a state party is just a job is your personal opinion and not policy. KidAd  •  SPEAK  05:24, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * By "just a job," I mean it's not an elected position, or a position answerable to constituents, which is really the justification for WP:NPOL - if you've been the member of a legislature, the assumption is you've been written about significantly per GNG at some point. The same is not true regarding members of local political parties. SportingFlyer  T · C  15:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete About all that's written about her is in context of losing the election to xyz candidate. Nothing of substance found beside that. Oaktree b (talk) 15:56, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:NPOL and the referencing outside of routine campaign coverage is not enough for a GNG pass. Per WP:POLOUTCOMES: Leaders of major sub-national (state, province, prefecture, etc.) parties are usually deleted unless notability can be demonstrated for other reasons.. An example is Articles for deletion/Ron Nehring (2nd nomination), which resulted in the deletion of a California GOP Chair. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:43, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete people who have universally lost in the elections they have run in are not notable. The one exception is very rarely US senate canddiates, not state senate ones. The last Idaho political candidate I created an article on (possibly the last political candidate I created an article on) was Raul Labrador. He was then a US House candidate, a race he won. However since he was a member of the Idaho legislature when he was running for US House, he was without question notable. In this case Beechler was even defeated when she ran for city council, she is just plain not notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:45, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment In the US being the "leader" of the state party aparatus is just a job. In some other countries being a leader of the party involves a lot more power and influence, but as things stand in the US leaders of state parties are not default notable. Many of them are notable for other reasons. For one thing it is unclear in the US who is more important, the state party chair, or state members of the party national committee. We do have an article on Michigan's current (at least assuming the article is up to date) Republic National Committeeman, Keith Butler (Michigan politician), but he is notable first and foremost as a religious leader, probably was notable as a member of the Detroit City Council, and has done some other things over the years that justify notability. Him being notable in no way means all 300 people who are major party state heads or national committe memebers (I think each state has 2 national committee memebers at any given time) are default notable. The fact of the matter is, some "major" political parties in the US have very little power, and it is the candidate and office holders from the party, not the appointed officials of the party, who really develop most of the politcies and positions of the party.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know that my count of how many people would be notable if we made Beechler's postion notable works out to about the membership of the New Hampshire House of Representatives, well that is 400, but close enough. If you look at the article we only have articles on maybe half the current members if that. It is the New Hampshire House of Representatives alone that makes me wonder if our view that every member of every legislature over a first level sub-national division at least in a government that has a federal form (such as US, Germany, Brazil, India, Mexico and I am sure there are others, I think Nigeria would qualify as well) is maybe including way too many politicians. Yet we keep finding articles on people who do not meet our fairly broad politician inclusion criteria.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:57, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete — politicians are notable if they satisfy any criterion from WP:NPOL or have in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources all of which the subject of our discussion doesn’t satisfy.
 * @, I consider your rationale for !voting a keep to be extremely unfair to me, whenever I opened the new pages feed your name was always one of the firsts I look out for because I believed your knowledge of WP:NPOL was flawless, well, up until recently, correct me if I’m wrong but haven’t I always reviewed your articles the very day they were created? Have I not reviewed over a dozen articles of yours moderately fast? saving you the anxiety of waiting? To now  insinuate that myself & (who by the way contributes extremely positively to the growth of this collaborative project) are somehow coordinating attacks against you is like i said, extremely unfair to me. Celestina007 (talk) 21:41, 14 April 2021 (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.