Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harriet Yeo


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Szzuk (talk) 19:18, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Harriet Yeo

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A local councillor and failed parliamentary candidate does not meet WP:POLITICIAN. Not enough significant, independent coverage to meet WP:GNG. Obi2canibe (talk) 12:09, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:21, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:21, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:21, 30 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. Yeo hasn't received WP:SUSTAINED coverage. A significant majority of the media coverage is limited to a short period of time and a single event. Ralbegen (talk) 10:04, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:13, 2 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. Being a member of the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party is probably enough for notability, but she has also served as its chair and as president of a fairly major trade union. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:18, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
 * None of these roles offer inherent notability.--Obi2canibe (talk) 12:45, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Chair of the Labour NEC is not a trivial post. Moreover there is more than adequate media coverage over the years. Atchom (talk) 00:19, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - the preamble to WP:N states "It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply." In this case I think that the significant posts that this person has held means that in any real-world sense she is notable and, if necessary, she should be one of the "occasional exceptions". Just Chilling (talk) 12:51, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 17:17, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * ' KEEP': this isn't promoting anyone, it's just the facts. would give benefit of doubt on GNG.  ThatLawStudent (talk) 19:42, 7 July 2019 (UTC)  Striking out a !vote by a sockpuppet. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:10, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - I think she meets notability as chair of the Labour Party NEC and her defection to UKIP certainly attracted a lot of media coverage and comment. Dunarc (talk) 22:36, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Necrothesp and Dunarc. Bondegezou (talk) 12:39, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep as she clearly held notable posts and has coverage. William2001(talk) 17:27, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - As per Necrothesp, meets notability requirements for her significant roles. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:22, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - per Necrothesp. Clear notability supported by sources already on page.A.Jacobin (talk) 14:59, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * keep, it's notable subject and also well sourced, too.Forest90 (talk) 11:11, 13 July 2019 (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.