Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tulip Siddiq


 * 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. Article's subject is found to be notable. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 00:05, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Tulip Siddiq

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I don't think Tulip Siddiq is notable, as she is just a candidate for election - holding no office and having no media coverage except by virtue of being a candidate for office. That contradicts this policy: []. Right now it just looks like a puff piece to promote her campaign. Feel free to correct me about what the rules are, but nobody replied to me on the talk page. Leviathant11 (talk) 23:09, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Gaff (talk) 23:21, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Gaff (talk) 23:22, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Gaff (talk) 23:23, 27 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Neutral Delete I tried to find something here worth keeping, but there are only a few wedding announcements, some stuff from primary sources/promo material. There are a few things mentioned that might be notable, but the references don't check out.  For example, a claim that she is the first Bengali woman in Camden Council links to a citation that says nothing of the sort (currently reference 12).  --Gaff (talk) 23:33, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The profile here also states that she is the first Bengali woman in Camden Council. I will look out for a better source. WJBscribe (talk) 15:12, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
 * @Gaff: This Telegraph article addresses the point as well. I will add it to the article. Does that affect your view? WJBscribe (talk) 18:13, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Moved to neutral. My concerns about the reliability/integrity of sources cited remains, because I simply do not have any time to commit to reviewing this article further.  My gestalt is that is might slide by as a keep, but a very weak one, for a nn politician who has made it in the news a bit because of powerful family connections.  However, I need to move on, so defer to community for consensus.    --Gaff (talk) 22:07, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Past practice has been that neither councillors nor PPCs are generally considered to be notable. However in this case she has also (possibly because of her family) also generated media interest in local and national press to meet GNG. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:54, 27 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. Meets WP:GNG. There is significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, indeed she is the subject of international press attention (including in India as well as Bangladesh), which makes this rather different from the average discussion of a councillor or candidate for Parliament (PPC). The media coverage is about her, not just her candidacy, and there is coverage that pre-dates her candidacy (e.g. the Evening Standard profile). We shouldn't lose sight of the general criteria for inclusion. We would not include her as a PPC or a councillor alone (although she did hold a cabinet level council position), or due to her notable relatives, but cannot ignore the fact that she is the subject of significant third party attention. It is the coverage itself (not just her status as a counsillor/PPC) that passes our inclusion criteria. WJBscribe (talk) 15:12, 4 March 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.