Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liz White (politician) (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   merge to Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada. The primary discussion point revolved around claims of notability via WP:GNG/WP:BASIC rather than WP:POLITICIAN, and the sticking point per policy is the question of whether there are sources each of which must, by policy, provide in-depth coverage. Consensus of those addressing the point was "no", and that consensus is in line with precedent. With non-trivial verifiable information, there's no policy-based reason presented to exclude that content from another appropriate place on Wikipedia, and Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada was the only target suggested. joe deckertalk to me 19:07, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Liz White (politician)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Does not meet WP:POLITICIAN. West Eddy (talk) 22:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable under WP:BIO. Contains third party sources. 117Avenue (talk) 03:55, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  — Frankie (talk) 23:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  — Frankie (talk) 23:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - per WP:GNG.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:31, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * note to closing admin this keep vote is almost to 3 others keep votes in 3 minutes by this editor, . LibStar (talk) 04:41, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * how exactly? As explained below a number of sources are not third party. LibStar (talk) 04:27, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete it's claimed that this article contains third party sources. It does indeed but none of them cover her at all. Refs 1, 2 and 4 are from her organisation and therefore non neutral. This one (ref 3) is about the best but only contains a brief quote from her in a news story about something else, hardly in depth coverage. Ref 11, ref 5 and the dead link ref 7 are simply official election results sheets, establishing her as an unsuccessful candidate. Ref 8 about the issue of minor parties being included in debates, contains a brief quote from her as party leader welcoming it, the dead link ref 9 appears to be the same, a non notable local news story. Ref 10 goes to the home page of a community website, and the ref title "Parties you don’t know that are running too" doesn't sound promising. Ref 6 is the only offline one and appears to be about the news story of legislation on animal cruelty, not White. Valenciano (talk) 21:39, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete/redirect for now Politician who is only of slight importance because she leads a party. Any information of significance about her can easily be incorporated into the party's article. She does potentially just qualify for her own article I think, but there just doesn't seem to be any coverage of her and the article as it stands is of no value. Article should be recreated once coverage in independent RS exists--Shakehandsman (talk) 05:35, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per --Me-123567-Me (talk) 21:19, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Leader of a noteworthy minor political party and passes the WP:GNG - You  really  can  21:54, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Any past consensus to "keep all leaders of political parties" has long since been overridden by Wikipedia's core requirement that biographies of living persons need to be sourced to the hilt or get canned; there is no "somebody might improve it someday" exemption for BLPs anymore. Although this article certainly cites more sources than most of the other minor political party leaders who are also currently up for AFD do, the references here are still virtually all either invalid primary sources or passing mentions of her in articles about other topics, failing the substantial coverage test. Accordingly, keep if the article can be improved by close; redirect to the party if it isn't. Notability is a question of the quality of sources that are or aren't present in the article, not a question of blanket "all X are notable" proclamations — if the sources aren't there, then an article does not get to stay. Bearcat (talk) 04:15, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * redirect - what Bearcat said. Either fix it - which means more independent sources covering the subject - or redirect to her party and include a summary of her there.Marikafragen (talk) 20:14, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge with Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada. The "Political history" section at least is sourced, noteworthy background that would improve another article, so outright deletion is a non-starter. Thing is, I don't see the "meets GNG" argument. (It seems there's general agreement that WP:POLITICIAN definitely isn't met, so GNG is the way forward here.) I was about to explain why none of the references currently in the article really help to establish notability, but Valenciano's already said everything I was going to. I tried looking for more online, but not much came up - this was about the high point I'm afraid. Alzarian16 (talk) 23:44, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge into Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada article. Agree with Bearcat that subject doesn't merit a separate article. DocTree (talk) 04:33, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Given that literally every mayor of a village with only 10 adult citizens counts as a politician, I would argue that any Article whose title actually requires "(politician)" in parentheses is not notable. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 07:56, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The inclusion of "(politician)" in parentheses is irrelevant to determining the presence or absence of notability — it's solely a question of whether or not there are other people with the same name who have articles on Wikipedia. We have plenty of articles about notable people whose articles have a parenthetical occupation listed in the title because there are other notable people who happen to have the same name. It has nothing to do with a person's basic notability or lack thereof. We even have at least one former Vice President of the United States whose title is disambiguated, and I certainly don't think you mean to argue that a US VP isn't notable just because his article can't be at his plain name. Bearcat (talk) 16:41, 5 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per my comments at Articles for deletion/George Dance (politician) earlier today.  The subject, Liz White, represents such a marginal party that she's never even gotten 1 % of the vote.  The emerging consensus is to delete minor politicial candidates, even small party leaders. I would not oppose a merge as suggested by Bearcat (no relation). Bearian (talk) 17:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per Toronto Star et al. -- →gab  24 dot  grab← 20:46, 5 May 2012 (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.