Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nola Fraser


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  00:47, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Nola Fraser

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

as per WP:BLP1E. she is only really related to the health department controversy. other information such as being a failed political candidate really is not notable. Michellecrisp (talk) 11:18, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * She is notable as an aspiring political figure who got a decent amount of coverage and as being involved in a scandal. I feel she fits the prerequisites of notability. --58.172.251.46 (talk) 17:52, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. I more or less agree with nominator's concerns. No present notability. LeaveSleaves talk 18:12, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - WP:BLP1E states very clearly it applies to "low-profile individuals." Someone who twice runs for New South Wales Legislative Assembly under a major party ticket (the Liberal party) is in no manner "low profile." --Oakshade (talk) 00:17, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment it doesn't how matter how many times they run, there is really little coverage of her unsuccessful attempts. Also I imagine there are very few WP articles devoted to unsuccessful candidates no matter what party they ran for. try looking up unsuccessful candidates from your own local area. Unless they do something notable in life like a mayor they are unlikely to have an article.Michellecrisp (talk) 12:19, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * She is the subject of substantial secondary coverage which is the core criteria of WP:BIO. You are correct that even if she ran only once, WP:BLP1E wouldn't apply as "low profile" people do not run for major state legislative office for a major party.  --Oakshade (talk) 17:09, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * "Someone who twice runs for New South Wales Legislative Assembly under a major party ticket (the Liberal party) is in no manner "low profile." You're kidding! Then you must think Glenn Brookes is not "low profile" either. Who? You know, Glenn Brookes. He contested the Electoral district of East Hills for the Liberal Party in 2003 and 2007. Just doesn't seem to have a Wikipedia article yet. WWGB (talk) 07:30, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems you're missing the point. WP:BLP1E is what the nom is citing as the reason to delete this article.  WP:BLP1E was created so that private individuals who found themselves in the news through no intention of their own did not automatically have Wikipedia articles about them in order to protect their privacy.  That's why WP:BLP1E clearly states its intended for "low profile" people.  When someone runs for a major legislative public office under a major party, they no longer are a private individual.  Not familiar with Glenn Brookes, but maybe he wasn't the subject of multiple secondary sources and passing WP:NOTABILITY as Nola Fraser is.  --Oakshade (talk) 20:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 05:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 05:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * keep While the health controversy might by itself be BLP1E there is additional coverage of the individual. That controversy when combined with the other political coverage makes Fraser notable enough. JoshuaZ (talk) 22:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:53, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Being a two-time losing candiate for local or regional office is not enough to make her notable, IMHO, but the addition of the whistleblowing stuff and subsequent media coverage combines to give her enough to keep this article, methinks.  Un  sch  ool  07:28, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable whistleblower who subsequently ran for political office. What JoshuaZ said. Rebecca (talk) 08:15, 4 December 2008 (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.