Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mindy Finn


 * 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 redirect to Evan McMullin. Black Kite (talk) 18:44, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Mindy Finn

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A big case of WP:BLP1E, not opposed to a redirect to Evan McMullin but she is not notable enough for a standalone article. She doesn't meet NPOL for being a running mate on a super failed campaign and the only mentions of her are related directly to the election, none of which are particularly substantial. This article has served little more than PR for her for several years. Praxidicae (talk) 20:59, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 22:56, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 22:56, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 22:56, 8 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Even at the vice-presidential level, being a non-winning minor candidate is not an automatic notability freebie that guarantees the right to a Wikipedia article — to qualify for one, she would still have to pass WP:GNG on the depth and quality of her sourcing. However, this is far too dependent on primary sources and glancing namechecks of her existence in coverage that isn't about her, which are not support for notability — and while there are also a few sources that are about her, there aren't enough. Bearcat (talk) 15:30, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is nothing more than a promotional article. A failed VP campaign is not notable. Barrettsprivateers (talk) 05:09, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. It seems like the criterion being used here is the success of the campaign, even though other VP candidates from independent/3rd party tickets maintain pages despite having done significantly worse and having nothing else of note to their name. Wikipedia in fact has a number of failed 3rd party VP articles, for example Ron Ehrenreich from 1980 to Lamont Lilly from the very same election as Finn's candidacy. Her notability also goes beyond her candidacy, Finn co-founded Engage with Patrick Ruffini (who has a page in his own right), founded a non-profit called Empowered Women, sits on the board of RepresentWomen and co-founded Stand Up Republic (which ought to have it's own page rather than redirecting). In short, she continues to be a public figure in the technology/politics/elections space, with work that includes several organizations which merit pages themselves. This article needs to be cleaned up and updated, but it merits keeping, given the historical significance and the ongoing work worth memorializing.Themanfromlamancha (talk) 16:52, 11 May 2020 (UTC) TheManFromLaMancha
 * No the criteria being used is WP:N and WP:NPOL. She has no sustained coverage. Praxidicae (talk) 16:53, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. An unsuccessful candidate might have attained notability for other reasons besides the candidacy per se, some unsuccessful candidates might clear WP:GNG because they got more substantial press coverage than other candidates did, and some of the articles about unsuccessful candidates that you've found might also be about non-notable people who should also just be deleted. There is no blanket notability for unsuccessful candidates per se: each candidate is evaluated strictly on the quality and depth and range of sourcing that he or she can personally show to support an article with, and not on any "if that one has an article then this one automatically has to have an article too" rule. So the fact that you're able to find other articles about other unsuccessful candidates does not prove in and of itself that this one needs to be kept. Bearcat (talk) 17:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I wasn't attempting to say merely that the article should stay because there are other such articles, but rather to point out more broadly that throughout the Wikipedia US Presidential election collection, running mates overwhelmingly have their own pages, even for independents and relatively small and unsuccessful 3rd parties. I've now looked back through the 1948 United States Presidential Election page to the 2016 United States Presidential Election page and the vast majority of VP candidates each election have pages, even when those candidates have done little else of notoriety. I provided the examples only to show that this is a consistent standard to have VP candidate pages, even for less well known parties and independents. But even aside from the candidacy, as I noted, there is plenty of other work ongoing worthy of inclusion.Themanfromlamancha (talk) 18:53, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The notability test for people is never just the things they did per se — it's the amount of media coverage they did or didn't get for doing the things they did. Bearcat (talk) 18:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Evan McMullin 2016 presidential campaign as McMullin's running mate and merge any relevant details about the subject/selection there. I am agreeing with Bearcat that there is just not enough sources supporting independent notability. --Enos733 (talk) 04:44, 15 May 2020 (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.