Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jan Jananayagam (2nd nomination)


 * 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The result was Withdrawn - no consensus. CaptainPrimo (talk) 06:42, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Jan Jananayagam
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

DELETE Politician who has not won anything (never elected to anything) and has not received significant coverage outside of self-published sources (her organizations) or around 1 event. WP:BLP1E would rule out having an article because she got the most votes for an independent candidate while losing. Only covered for single event and this event is not well-documented and not of long lasting importance.

As an activist she has only attracted trivial coverage: representative of so and so group Jan said 'such and such'. Many of these mentions are also in promotional material from her organizations. Being interviewed on a news program does not merit notability. A daily news program interviews many people most of them not notable and only significant as presenting an opinion to a wider notable issue.

So basically a low profile individual -- ''May have been quoted or even profiled in a local or special-interest newspaper, website, magazine or other publication. May have been interviewed by a major news source as a "mouthpiece" – i.e., as part of his/her job as a spokesperson for an employer, representing that party not him/herself.'' Who_is_a_low_profile_individual -- a person likely to remain a low-profile individual is not notable. CaptainPrimo (talk) 00:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC) — CaptainPrimo (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep - According to this BBC article on her, which is far more than "trivial" nor "self published" as the nom claims, she is "one of the most successful independent candidates ever." --Oakshade (talk) 02:57, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * She lost and hasn't contested anything since. Being the most successful independent candidate in one election while not winning is not notable. It's one event and a violation of WP:BLP1E as I already said. CaptainPrimo (talk) 05:22, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You'll have to take up your contention that being one of the most successful independent candidates ever isn't notable with the BBC News. I have to type this in many AfD's; WP:BLP1E does not and has never "banned" articles on people notable for only one event.  It is simply a guideline on how to deal with people notable for one event.--Oakshade (talk) 05:35, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * What? She's not one of the most successful independent candidates ever. If that is true then no independent candidate has ever got more than 2% of the vote. The article says she was one of the most successful candidates in that election. BBC News has articles on a wide variety of things. Adam Lanza for example but he isn't notable enough to have an article according to Wikipedia.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20738732


 * I suggest your read BLP1E like I did. should generally avoid having an article on a person when each of three conditions is met:A. If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.B. If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view. In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article. It is not the case that the event is significant and the individual's role within it is substantial and well-documented—as in the case of John Hinckley, Jr., who shot President Ronald Reagan in 1981.


 * Now tell me how she does not meet all three of this conditions because to me she certainly does. BBC only covers her as a candidate and has not covered her since meeting point A, she remains a low-profile individual as noted in the nomination, and the individual's role is not well-documented -- no other sources tout how successful she is. CaptainPrimo (talk) 05:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Her biography information in the BBC News article (and many others) is outside the scope of the election. BLP1E is meant to discourage articles about private individuals who unwittingly found themselves in the news.  This person very willingly place herself in a very public political arena.  As Who is a low profile individual, which even you had linked so presumably value, indicates, this person does not fit any of its criteria of "low profile."--Oakshade (talk) 05:57, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * What biography information? That she is a "former banker" and an "It consultant"? I challenge you to show the "many other" articles that document her. CaptainPrimo (talk)
 * She is a low-profile individual outside of her failed bid for the EU parliament. (which is what BLP1E calls for). She has talked to programs as a representative of the advocacy group she's a member of not representing herself. CaptainPrimo (talk) 06:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Here's some other "notable" people that Oakshade might want to create articles for because BBC News had 1 article on them. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7098116.stm Bike sex case sparks legal debate (apparently this sparked legal debate -- sounds like something really important Oakshade) Failed cable thief who fell from Manchester viaduct jailed http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-20902527 CaptainPrimo (talk) 06:00, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:08, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:08, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:08, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * KEEP. She got more votes than the Scottish Socialist Party, Alliance Party of Northern Ireland or Green Party in Northern Ireland, all of which are cleasrly notable. Therefore she's notable too. -- Cabalamat (talk) 16:51, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Those parties have contested more than one election and have won seats in local government. This person hasn't. And since the Scottish Socialist Party did win seats they got more votes: 245,735 votes in total. CaptainPrimo (talk) 17:44, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article".

In the case of candidates for political office who do not meet this guideline, the general rule is to redirect to an appropriate page covering the election or political office sought in lieu of deletion.


 * There's only 1 RS but more than 1 is required.


 * I would be fine with a redirect if that's what it takes. CaptainPrimo (talk) 17:59, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Also Otherstuffexists. CaptainPrimo (talk) 18:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

As this is heading for no consensus, I'm going to withdraw. CaptainPrimo (talk) 06:42, 5 January 2013 (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.