Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Cartwright (Pennsylvania politician)


 * 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. Clearly the consensus is against an outright deletion, although the call for a redirect to the election has some merit. On the other hand, there seems to be a clear majority who feel that the coverage is sufficient for a full biography, even before the election. Sjakkalle (Check!)  19:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Matt Cartwright (Pennsylvania politician)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Doesn't meet notability criteria per WP:POLITICIAN. Should redirect to article about the congressional race. Arbor8 (talk) 16:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirecting to United States House of Representatives elections in Pennsylvania, 2012 until such time as he actually does win the election (if he does) makes sense for now (that section needs rewriting to be up-to-date, btw). postdlf (talk) 17:08, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect as per WP:POLITICIAN to the link provided by User:Postdlf, for which thanks. He hasn't won yet and the standard is fairly clear.  "[T]he general rule is to redirect to an appropriate page covering the election or political office sought in lieu of deletion."  I looked for media coverage outside Pennsylvania and found little or nothing relevant; thus far, he's of state-level interest only.  As always, there is no prejudice to recreating this if and when he becomes notable.  Ubelowme (talk) 17:11, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * But there are lots of articles on wikipedia who have pages about them even though they haven't done anything notable either e.g Steve Daines and yet their articles have not been deleted either, so can the article not stay. Slytherining Around32 (talk) 17:28, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. That argument is governed by a policy known colloquially as other stuff exists.  Feel free to nominate Steve Daines for deletion, or improve the article by adding citations, at your leisure.  Ubelowme (talk) 17:38, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly fulfills the second criterion of WP:POLITICIAN: "Major figures in national or first-level sub-national political races." A major party nominee for congressional office qualifies. The article should be kept as Matthew Cartwright is notable as he is expected to become the new Democratic Congressman for the Pennsylvania's 17th congressional district in the United States House of Representatives elections, 2012 due to it being a safe Democratic Party seat. Also he is notable for having defeated the 18-year incumbent Congressman Tim Holden in the Democratic primary by 57%-43%. So since most newspapers and politicians are saying that he is going to be elected I therefore strongly believe that this article on Matthew Cartwright should be both kept and he is notable.Slytherining Around32 (talk) 18:15, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. We must be looking at different versions of WP:POLITICIAN; mine doesn't say that.  In fact, it says pretty much the opposite: "Just being … an unelected candidate for political office does not guarantee notability …".  Best of luck with your election.  Ubelowme (talk) 19:16, 8 June 2012 (UTC
 * Its not my election as i'm not an american nor am I standing for elected office, but Matt Cartwright is expected to win this congressional seat so i fail to see why he does count for notability. Slytherining Around32 (talk) 23:40, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Slytherining also created Brendan Doherty, another candidate.  Might as well add that article to the AfD. Bgwhite (talk) 06:27, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:GNG with significant coverage in reliable sources. Criterion #2 of WP:POLITICIAN supports Cartwright's notability. Defeating a 20-year incumbent and being a major party nominee in a Congressional election qualifies him as a "major local political figure." Regardless, criterion #3 says, failing that, "such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion." See New York Times, Times-Tribune, The Hill, Morning Call, CBS News, Huff Po, Express-Times, National Journal or the majority of the news articles in this search, which demonstrate that Cartwright has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources. Roll Call also says he has been a regular face on TV for years with his "The Law and You" segment airing five nights a week on the NBC affiliate WBRE-TV. Gobōnobo  + c 13:52, 9 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep – Upon reviewing the links above provided by User:Gobonobo, this person certainly passes WP:BASIC and WP:GNG with ease. Northamerica1000(talk) 21:52, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete has not held notable elected office and is merely a candidate. Multiple independent sources are nothing if they don't include significant coverage, and those given above only cover the primary election. Hekerui (talk) 13:37, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think the breadth of coverage (much of it highlighted by Gobonobo, above) speaks to notability here. Being likely to be elected is not itself a source of notability - see WP:CRYSTAL, and I don't care how safe your district is (See also Richard Lugar). The critical factor here, to me at least, is that lots of sources discussed the primary campaign, and many did so by talking about Mr. Cartwright. That's sufficient. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 14:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep fulfills criteria #2 for WP:POLITICIAN as he is certainly "major", running for Congress, and has achieved press in multiple feature articles, per above. Smartyllama (talk) 19:39, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep I consider being a  candidate for a national office of one of the two main parties in a two -party system  a major accomplishment. We have not always kept these, when the sources were borderline, as is often the case, but here's an instance when there are clearly enough sources. Whether you go by common sense standards of notability or by the GNG, this meets the requirements for an article.  DGG ( talk ) 05:56, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - even if he didn't meet WP:POILTICIAN, which it appears he does, he certainly appears to meet the WP:GNG. Be careful of falling into the trap that "if it doesn't meet X, it's just not notable" without checking for GNG meeting. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:43, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Major party candidate (and nominee) in a U.S. federal election. Even if he doesn't win, and all polls say he will in November, he defeated a 10-term U.S. Rep. in the primary election. Scanlan (talk) 15:15, 18 June 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.