Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joanne Cash


 * 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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 16:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Joanne Cash

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Not notable lawyer and candidate for the 2010 election Off2riorob (talk) 16:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - Proven notable by continued coverage in reliable sources, and thus meets the criteria under general notability guidelines. Bastin 16:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * What is she notable for? The coverage what there is of it is that she married a rich guy and is a cameron cutie and a candidate for the election, none of these thing make her notable. Off2riorob (talk) 16:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * You don't seem to have read the notability guidelines that I linked above. Coverage in reliable sources guarantees notability, whether or not she meets the other, more specific, criteria, as established, indeed, by the biographies criteria. Bastin 14:53, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - She is a notable person. The coverage isn't that she's a "Cameron cutie", that's a rather unpleasant put-down - she's a well-respected lawyer at the very least. It's that she was being forced out because her local association was too old fashioned and didn't like her. The article could be improved, but I think it's a bit premature to delete it. Maybe if she doesn't win the seat maybe then it could be deleted. Would be a waste to delete it and then create a new one if she wins, if indeed anyone could be bothered then. John Smith&#39;s (talk) 21:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: From news coverage, the local association's complaint seems to be that she doesn't get involved in doorstep campaigning, not that she's too modern. The Chariwoman who resigned was one of those who pushed for Cash's selection in the first place. 86.144.8.112 (talk) 23:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well they're not going to admit they're dinosaurs, are they? But certainly it's caused a controversy that makes her worth mentioning. At the least it should stay up until after the election. We can review it later if she doesn't get elected. John Smith&#39;s (talk) 23:14, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not registered so can't vote, but I agree the article is notable enough, at least until the election (and obviously afterwards if she wins). I was merely taking issue with the "dinosaurs" line - that's certainly her line, and it may be being encouraged by the party overlords, but the grassroots in that constituency don't seem to qualify for the unpleasant "dinosaurs" or "turnip taliban" label, and the woman Cash clashed with in particular certainly doesn't.86.144.8.112 (talk) 23:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Not sure that the article makes the case that she is notable as a lawyer. As a politician, the Wp:Notability (people) line is that unelected candidates are not notable except in exceptional circumstances. I can't see that that applies in this case. She is close to Cameron, which possibly edges her towards being notable as I believe that has received media coverage in the past. However the current furore surrounding her resignation/non-resignation comes under WP:Not News. If elected she would of course qualify automatically for an article. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 02:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Joanne Cash is clearly notable enough for wikipedia and she does live in Westminster North. Whoever changed that please could you change it back.


 * Check the front page of the Independent 10th Feb, check the Times, Telegraph, Daily Mail, Evening Standard etc


 * Aside from recent events her personal achievements in law are considerable, she is also featured on the wikipedia page for Westminster North. —Preceding unsigned comment added by His5s4g (talk • contribs) 19:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment those recent articles in the paper probably point to her being notable enough.  Wik  idea  08:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I didn't delete any articles or links at all. You really should be more diligent when reading things.
 * I'm not a Republican, you idiot, as my user page actually explicitly states. Most people in the UK are monarchists and Eurosceptic, so who knows why you brought that up.  And what the hell does it have to do with anything, again, when he content of my edits was constructive? Bastin 11:21, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment-Political candidates are not notable, we have recently established that, she is also not notable as a lawyer, the press coverage is minimal, anything that has been in the press about this possible resignation is also one event type coverage and does nothing additional to assert notability, she's not notable until she wins the seat. Off2riorob (talk) 18:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * No, no, no. The notability guidelines quite clearly state, as I linked above, that coverage in reliable sources are the important thing.  If someone receives coverage in reliable sources, they are notable as a matter of course, whether or not they meet the specific guidelines for politicians, etc.  Those guidelines are for people whose notability in reliable sources has not been proven.  In this case, it has been. Bastin 15:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment- User John Smith has voted keep with the comment, "Maybe if she doesn't win the seat maybe then it could be deleted. Would be a waste to delete it and then create a new one if she wins" .. this is also a position that I have previously supported but the community has recently decided that it is against this position, being a political candidate does not infer any notability. Off2riorob (talk) 18:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - may I also add the Dinosaur reference has been on her twitter page for months and refers to those MPs caught up in the expenses saga and has nothing to do with the local association. —Preceding unsigned comment added by His5s4g (talk • contribs) 10:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * — His5s4g (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * As there is already a wikipedia page dedicated to the Westminster North seat with Joanne Cash listed as a candidate on it what sense does it make to delete her profile? Surely this is the point of wikipedia to form a connected web of articles. Joanne Cash is featured in this months edition of Vogue for her legal achievements she is clearly notable beyond being the candidate of Westminster North. —Preceding unsigned comment added by His5s4g (talk • contribs) 23:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Westminster North (UK Parliament constituency) (or Delete) - not notable just for being a Prospective Parliamentary Candidate. No real claim that she is notable as a lawyer - only one brief mention in a single newspaper article for this.  The remainder of the coverage appears to be about WP:ONEEVENT, which if it merits coverage anywhere, should be a line in the Westminster North (UK Parliament constituency) article. Warofdreams talk 10:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)


 * If she's notable only for the one event, how come there are so many references to her before then? Why is she consistently tipped as one of the top Conservative candidates?  Why was she listed as one of the fifty most notable women of the age (a laughable claim, but one that was nonetheless made)?  That illustrates notability far beyond either her candidacy or the single event. Bastin 15:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - the article is now much improved, and the range of references which have been found since I commented, particularly those covering her activities as a lawyer, convince me that she is more notable than the earlier version and an internet search suggested. Warofdreams talk 14:55, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 14:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Incubate. Until result of election in May. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  14:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * There is no notability to this subject, a political candidate that is a friend of david cameron and was in the paper recently as she threatened to resign and she is married to a rich person. Redirect and incubate, if she wins she becomes notable is she loses you will never hear about her again. 14:29, 17 February 2010 (UTC)Off2riorob (talk)


 * Too bad that your opinions are contradicted by the fact that she has received press coverage before this incident happened. Bastin 14:59, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Previous coverage, yes an op-ed about her getting married to a rich person, nothing of any substance at all. There clearly isn't an assertion of notability as yet or the AFD would not be relisted, so please show us where is this notability as it has not been asserted yet. My position is this, she is a political candidate and that is not notable unless she wins and if she does then she will be notable but right now at wiikipedia, like all the other election candidates she is not notable. Off2riorob (talk) 15:06, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The assertion of notability is clearly in that other reliable sources, such as the Sunday Times, Observer, Sunday Telegraph, Tatler, and Vogue have all cited her as having notability beyond that of a mere candidate. It is not Wikipedia's place to contradict reliable sources, but to report them. Bastin 15:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Redirect per Warofdreams. Fails WP:POLITICIAN, but as a candidate, that is a reason to redirect, not delete. Ray  Talk 18:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The assertion of her notability is not just on the back of her candidacy, as stated below. It is on the back of a slew of reliable sources considering her to be notable as one of the top young Conservatives / Conservative candidates / women of the age. Bastin 15:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Can we decide please? - In my opinion she is clearly notable from a legal perspective alone. The links go back 5 years to before she became the candidate. Joanne only met her husband in 2007 after she was selected, and it's interesting people assume he's rich. Her husband has only come into the debate in the last 10 days before which she was notable as a result of her own achivements. She is in this months Vogue where she is listed as one of the 50 women of the age which is hardly going to be on the back of her just being a candidate.

'''A fair compromise is to keep her profile live until the election which is a matter of weeks away. If she loses delete it if not the profile will need updating.''' —Preceding unsigned comment added by His5s4g (talk • contribs) 00:04, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

May I add Joanne Cash does not live in Notting Hill. Notting Hill is in Kensington and Chelsea not Westminster North, a fact confirmed by wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by His5s4g (talk • contribs) 16:02, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * No, the Notting Hill article is simply too prescriptive, and is factually wrong to limit Notting Hill to just North Kensington (which is a part of Notting Hill, but does not include, for example, Westbourne Park). As stated repeatedly in reliable sources, Cash lives in Notting Hill.  In Westbourne ward (Leamington Road Villas, I believe, but I'm not entirely sure).  This is in the area commonly known as 'Notting Hill', but also in Westminster North.  However, again, this is not the forum for such discussions; there is a talk page for disputes over content. Bastin 16:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I take your point but at the same time her home is within a stones throw of the Brunel Estate as well as the technical boundary of Notting Hill, I understand the Notting Hill tag is more convenient given the recent press and will reframe from changing it. From the level of debate and detail of the page can we please remove the deletion tag as Joanne Cash is clearly notable enough for wikipedia and not famous for simply being a candidate.

On a technical question why doesn't google direct me to this page? It comes up with Johnny Cash. —Preceding unsigned comment added by His5s4g (talk • contribs) 16:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - Sorry my final input unless someone raises something specific that needs clarifying. The notability criteria states, "Just being an elected local official, or an 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." Cash has received coverage from multiple notable sources over many years. She is a highly regarded expert in her field and regarded by Vogue as one of the 50 women of the age. Cash is clearly notable enough for a wikipedia page and now has a full very well sourced article.--His5s4g (talk) 00:30, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Redirect to the constituency until the election, then restore. I know Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, but as the constituency is strongly Conservative it's highly likely that she'll be the area's next MP. Paul Largo (talk) 16:48, 19 February 2010 (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.