Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karen Stintz mayoral campaign, 2014


 * 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. j⚛e deckertalk 14:56, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Karen Stintz mayoral campaign, 2014

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Content fork for the campaign of a minor political candidate who dropped out after receiving 2% or less support in public opinion polls. Downwoody (talk) 00:11, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  00:29, 4 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete I really can't see the point in any campaign articles for elections to a third tier body or post, but especially if she's not even going to contest the election (she may not even pass WP:POLITICIAN, plus aside from one small bit about voice lessons, her article reads like it's written by a publicist). I would also support the deletion of all the other campaign articles and just have a campaign section in the mayoral election article. Number   5  7  14:44, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Toronto is in the narrow range of internationally famous metropolitan world cities for which serving on the city council is considered sufficient basis for an article under WP:NPOL (it's actually specifically named in WP:POLOUTCOMES as one of the canonical examples of cities whose councillors qualify), and her battles with Rob Ford over transit policy in the past council term would likely be sufficient to get her past NPOL #3 ("Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage") even if serving on Toronto City Council weren't already accepted as a legitimate notability claim in its own right. So her article definitely needs improvement, but she does pass NPOL — though, of course, that still doesn't mean we need to maintain this spinoff article. Bearcat (talk) 17:51, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I wondered whether the coverage of her might help her pass #3 but when I searched I only got local papers. TBH, as a London resident, I'm rather surprised that London Assembly members are typically kept... Number   5  7  20:54, 4 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I was never particularly crazy about the idea of spinning out separate standalone articles for each individual candidate's campaign, but opted not to take on the responsibility of actively nominating them for deletion at the time. Simply put, we don't need this much forked content for a municipal election — I suppose I might be wrong, but I don't think we've kept separate spinoff articles for any individual candidate's individual campaign in any other municipal election before this one (either in Toronto or anywhere else). This, and all four of its other siblings in, should indeed be deleted — important campaign announcements certainly merit mention in the main article on the election itself and/or in the candidates' standalone bios, but we don't need these as an extra layer of articles. (I will grant that since the others are still active candidates rather than withdrawn ones as Stintz is, they should be nominated separately rather than being added to this nomination or deleted solely on the basis of the consensus established here — but we still don't need standalone articles about their campaigns.) Bearcat (talk) 17:41, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:44, 4 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete, and the same for all of the Toronto Mayoral Campaign articles. WP:NOTNEWS, right?   PK  T (alk)  01:50, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Nothing notable about this campaign article and there's already a section on the campaign in her individual article. 131.118.229.17 (talk) 01:49, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per Bearcat. How is a story about a single non-starting local election campaign anywhere near notable enough for an article? Bearian (talk) 20:40, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete in agreement with delete arguments. Alaney2k (talk) 17:25, 12 September 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.