Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Misty K. Snow


 * 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. Despite failing WP:POLITICIAN, Snow clearly passes WP:GNG, and thus can have an article. (non-admin closure) JudgeRM   (talk to me)  03:10, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Misty K. Snow
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Snow was trounced in the election, and the campaign generated very little actual attention in Utah, with Lee gliding to victory. The attention is just one event and not long term or sustained enough to justify an article. John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:33, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Snow's campaign was so lacking in chances to succeed that its local news coverage received less coverage than some US house races. It is an example of a senate campaign that clearly does not rise to the level of notability for the candidates.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:42, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 November 24.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 16:00, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:01, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:01, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:01, 24 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment This article might as well be titled "Snow should not have an article on Wikipedia", highlighting that it was essentially a non-race for the senate seat.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:46, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep: The "keep" close was less than six months ago, so it probably shouldn't have been renominated so quickly (nor should this have happened). The fact that she lost doesn't really invalidate the keep arguments made in the previous AfD, which was closed easily as keep.  She's still the first tranny to get nominated for a Congressional seat and she still passes GNG fairly easily.  Also, I'd dispute the above claim that she doesn't have as much sourcing as challengers in some other races; I see a lot of national sources in the article that normally wouldn't trouble themselves with a small-state Senate race.  p  b  p  21:32, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Though WP:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes that suggests unelected candidates are often merged, WP:NPOL is clear that unelected candidates can still qualify as notable on the basis of WP:GNG. Snow clearly does, and is not excluded by WP:BLP1E--that would only exclude her if the event she's known for were not "significant" (see condition #3--all three conditions must apply for exclusion). Snow attracted international press attention with a campaign numerous WP:RS called "historic". When extensive reliable sources treat an event as significant, it's not the place of WP editors to overrule them. Here are some of those sources:
 * CNN
 * The Advocate
 * The Washington Post
 * The Guardian
 * NPR
 * People
 * The Huffington Post
 * Refinery29
 * Telegraph (UK)
 * Heavy.com
 * The Hill
 * Broadly
 * Le Monde (France)
 * Radio Canada (in French)
 * The Washington Blade
 * Tetu (France)
 * Slate-FR (French edition)
 * Huffington Post-Quebec
 * I'll stop there but I want to note, those are just searches from my primary languages, I haven't checked Spanish, Italian, etc. yet because, well, the extent of the evidence seems pretty clear-cut to me. Innisfree987 (talk) 22:46, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, to note as well: this list also leaves out all the local Utah press coverage we treat as routine for political candidates. But I want to note it's out there, for anyone interested in developing the entry--even if it doesn't go to notability, it's fair game for content purposes. Innisfree987 (talk) 23:01, 24 November 2016 (UTC)


 * See also Articles for deletion/Misty Plowright (2nd nomination) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:05, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per all the sources listed above. She lost the election but acquired such notability during the campaign that it may be foolhardy to get rid of the article altogether. Perhaps the page would benefit from some bulking up, but it clearly passes WP:GNG. Gargleafg (talk) 00:08, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep Well, this is a first for me in eight years at Wikipedia: an AfD-IDHT. Permit me to say again what all six keeps said at AfD1: although she fails WP:POLITICIAN, she easily passes GNG on the grounds of her being an LGBT historic first. That historic first remains despite her not winning the election. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:09, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per Gargleafg, Innisfree987, etc. Shearonink (talk) 02:32, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:POLITICIAN and none of the sources cited really cover the candidate in-depth. Instaurare (talk) 23:49, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Can you give a point of comparison? I ask because my experience at AfD is that these sources represent really extensive coverage; I'm really not sure by what measuring stick we could say this isn't in-depth coverage. I've never seen a case that had anything like this amount of coverage be deleted. Innisfree987 (talk) 03:59, 26 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - Per sources presented here and in the previous AfD (losing an election doesn't remove notability, it just means the election results aren't the basis for notability). &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 14:45, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. A non-winning candidate who fails NPOL can, in certain circumstances, still pass another notability criterion for another reason. The first candidacy by a member of a historically oppressed minority, for example, can be enough to get a person into Wikipedia if they've gotten a WP:GNG-satisfying volume of coverage for that fact. (By comparison, while I can't speak for any other country we do have an article about the first-ever transgender candidate for political office in Canada, even though she didn't win either — because "first transgender candidate" is, in and of itself, enough to make her candidacy more notable than the norm.) While the article as written does need some improvement, Innisfree987 has amply demonstrated above that better sourcing does exist to improve it with — the coverage doesn't just nationalize, it internationalizes to Canada, the UK, France and Germany in a way that coverage of non-winning US congressional candidates very rarely does. And that's exactly how you show that a candidacy is more notable than the norm: press coverage far beyond the routine and expected. Bearcat (talk) 15:11, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect to short summary at Utah Democratic Party subhead Democratic Party.   Snow is a grocery store clerk chosen to run against a popular incumbent enabling the Democratic Party to make a conciliatory gesture towards Saunders supports and a strong pro-LGBT statement.  This marks a moment in electoral history.  She should be also be discussed on LGBT rights in the United States.   But there is absolutely nothing encyclopedic to say about her.  There is nothing at all to say about her except that she was nominated by a major party.  I simply cannot find a reason to keep this as a stand-alone article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:01, 30 November 2016 (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.