Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruth Alcroft


 * 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 delete. Consensus is pretty clear that notability criteria are not met. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:18, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Ruth Alcroft

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject clearly does not meet WP:GNG or WP:POLITICIAN. The subject may well do following the 2019 General Election, but this article has been published into the mainspace WP:TOOSOON. PROD contested by. Domeditrix (talk) 16:08, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

"sub-national (e.g., province- or state-wide) office". Carlisle is a major council in the "province" of Cumbria. Please stop this vandalism.
 * Subject is one of three local councillor for a small ward, not a council leader or mayor. Notability criteria clearly not met. Also, you may wish to vote in this AfD discussion. Domeditrix (talk) 16:37, 21 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  NNADI GOOD LUCK  ( Talk &#124; Contribs ) 16:15, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  NNADI GOOD LUCK  ( Talk &#124; Contribs ) 16:15, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  NNADI GOOD LUCK  ( Talk &#124; Contribs ) 16:15, 21 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. Non-notable politician. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lard Almighty (talk • contribs) 19:56, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - The subject is not notable enough at the moment. If of course she was to be elected as a Member of Parliament, then it would be entirely appropriate for an article to be created. Dunarc (talk) 21:53, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates in elections they have not already won; the notability test for politicians is holding a notable office, not just running for one. The only other way they can qualify for an article before holding office is to have already been notable enough for other reasons that they already qualified to have an article anyway, but being a local councillor is not an "inherently" notable political role either: politicians at the local level are accepted as notable only if they can show a depth and range and volume of reliable source coverage that's unusual enough to make them much more special than most other local politicians, and the sourcing here is completely failing to demonstrate that. Obviously this will be recreatable on or after election day if she wins, because her basis for notability will have changed, but simply being a candidate is not grounds for an article as of today. Bearcat (talk) 22:11, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. No notable being a candidate. Meeting WP:NPOL is a after elected criteria. Fails WP:NPOL. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 05:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I wish we had a speedy delete category for these candidate articles. Clearly fails WP:NPOL. Bondegezou (talk) 11:59, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Coming in late to the party, but not notable.  scope_creep Talk  12:00, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

There is precedence of other councillors having their own Wiki page despite not being elected as an MP yet. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibrahim_Dogus.
 * So there may be a case for AfD'ing that article as well. --RaviC (talk) 23:55, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - I agree with RaviC That does not automatically mean that every Councillor should have an article and is not really an argument for retaining this article - please see OTHER. Equally I think a case could be made for deleting the Ibrahim Dogus article as well. Dunarc (talk) 23:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Councillors can have their own Wiki page if they meet other notability criteria. what other notability criteria does Ruth Alcroft meet? Discussion on Ibrahim Dogus can continue elsewhere (I think he meets WP:GNG personally). Bondegezou (talk) 10:23, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * If this deletion is to be done for all councillors, it should be done all at once and not by individual targeting. We are currently in the middle of an election and I feel that it is wrong to only now start to discuss the deletion of these articles of councillors in provincial offices. Alcroft is a notable figure locally and as a candidate this is why the page was created. Hold off until the 13th December and if she is not elected (or Dogus) as an MP then delete the page. Until then, I feel that this page meets the requirements of a notable politician.
 * It doesn't matter what you "feel". What matters is whether she meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines. When asked again what, specifically, makes her notable (simply being a local councillor doesn't), you have failed to answer. You have just engaged in whataboutery. Lard Almighty (talk) 15:54, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * We do not impose a moratorium on deleting candidate articles just because the election is underway — if we did that, then we'd simply get flooded with candidate articles in the moratorium period, because every candidate in every election would just mob us with their campaign brochures since they weren't deletable anymore. So no, we don't treat such articles any differently during the election campaign than we would at any other time. Obviously, if she wins the seat the article will be recreatable at that time since her notability claim will have changed — but creating new articles is not difficult enough to require a moratorium on deleting the old ones just because recreation might become necessary in the future. We even have the ability to very easily restore the original article with one click on one button if needed.
 * Also, please familiarize yourself with the WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument. The fact that Ibrahim Dogus has an article does not automatically mean that Ruth Alcroft has to have one too — it is indeed possible that Dogus needs to be deleted too, but his article is also making other claims of preexisting notability for other reasons besides the fact of holding a local government position per se, and in fact the article already existed for those preexisting reasons before he was even a councillor. So he's not automatically equivalent to Alcroft just because they're both local councillors — they each have to be evaluated strictly on their own merits, and deleting one does not automatically require deleting the other too. Bearcat (talk) 15:43, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Her notability has been recorded and I've made the point of precedence elsewhere on the site. It makes no sense to only enforce part of the rules part of the time.
 * Wikipedia is a perpetual work in progress. It is too big for things to be "done all at once". We have to work one article at a time, and that's what the rules and guidelines say we should do. If this article should be deleted, we delete it. If there are other articles that should be deleted, then I suggest you WP:PROD them, or bring them to AfD. I have brought several politician articles to AfD recently. Bondegezou (talk) 12:25, 27 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:POLITICIAN. Subject in question has not (yet) been elected to any notable position of government. --RaviC (talk) 23:55, 23 November 2019 (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.