Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tanya De Mello


 * 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. No prejudice to recreation at a later date when notability can be established. Ping me for any content to be userfied. Jujutacular (talk) 05:00, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Tanya De Mello

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a person notable primarily as an as yet unelected candidate in a forthcoming election, sourced entirely to a YouTube video of a TEDx talk and press releases, announcing her wins of non-notable internal university student body awards, on the websites of the universities she was educated at — these are all primary sources which cannot confer notability, and no reliable source coverage has been shown. This is effectively just a campaign brochure, which demonstrates no reason why she would have qualified for a Wikipedia article before being named as an electoral candidate — but if you cannot adequately demonstrate that, then the candidate does not become notable enough for a Wikipedia article until they win the election. Delete, without prejudice against recreation on October 19 if she wins her seat. Bearcat (talk) 16:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for starting this conversation and ensuring ongoing quality. I believe this is a worthy article, or else I would not have posted it in the first place. I will supplant some of the sources with one's of secondary nature, such as interviews, newspaper features, etc, to show that this individual - a veritable expert in human rights issues and community activist - may have a page. If there is too much information, I am not opposed to it being pared down significantly, especially with respect to student awards, etc, which do not speak to her general relevance. I will add reliable secondary sources and edit, but I think it is important to include political actors in the Canadian context, especially women of colour, to properly represent the Canadian political landscape and mosaic. Namtug (talk) 15:06, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Just to be clear, our notability standards for politicians generally require that they have actually held a notable office. We don't give freebies to unelected candidates just because anyone likes their ideology, or because they belong to an underrepresented minority community — we have no institutional ideology, and are not a venue for public relations promotion of aspiring officeholders. We also don't confer notability on local community activists whose prominence is exclusively local to a single city — a person has to have a national profile to get over our notability standards for activists. You are correct that she might get over our notability standards for her human rights work, if she can be reliably sourced as having garnered substantive coverage for it — but nobody gets to claim an inclusion freebie just because they do important work, if the reliable sourcing isn't there to support it. Bearcat (talk) 16:04, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I completely subscribe to your point of view, let me add some links bolstering the aforementioned qualities and if it is the prevailing viewpoint that the candidate does not yet warrant a page, I will fully adhere to the decision making process as set out. Namtug (talk) 15:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I just cut some of the material and added more sources bolstering the De Mello's background in human rights work. Please let me know your thoughts. She is a person of importance in the Canadian context, hence the creation of this page. Namtug (talk) 17:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You added one single source different from what was already there before — and that source isn't about her, but merely namechecks her existence as a participant in the thing which is the subject of the source. That's not what it takes to prove that she satisfies WP:GNG. Bearcat (talk) 20:40, 2 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 17:29, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Toffanin (talk) 17:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Wikipedia is not a free host for election campaign advertising, no notability so far, no coverage in independent sources Kraxler (talk) 00:05, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete does not satisfy WP:POLITICIAN. I also adopt @Kraxler's well-thought rationale. Quis separabit?  21:39, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:27, 4 September 2015 (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.