Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Whitney Mutch


 * 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. JForget 00:08, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Whitney Mutch

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable per WP:BIO and WP:POLITICIAN. Online news archive search turns up only a mention of student award at school. Single reference given lists only that subject is running for office, and candidates for office are not inherently notable. WP:ORPHAN article. Prod contested by author. MuffledThud (talk) 06:04, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  —MuffledThud (talk) 06:06, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. Just being a candidate in itself doesn't satisfy notability criteria and there's nothing else there that does. Also on a procedural point, creators of articles shouldn't remove prod templates, they should contest them. Valenciano (talk) 07:59, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I created the article, and removed the notice, since I updated the article to include notability, and according to the notice, I should remove it if I do. Sorry for overstepping procedure. Llamabr (talk) 16:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually you did nothing wrong; anyone can contest a prod by removing the notice. I think Valenciano might be thinking about CSD, which should not be removed by the article creator. Tim Song (talk) 04:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * My apologies, I didn't know that the CSD and Prod situations were different. Valenciano (talk) 07:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment:  I can't find any news coverage of her candidacy. I was wondering if she'll even be 30 before she'd take office, but it appears she will (assuming she wins). --Milowent (talk) 20:16, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Nom nailed this one. Ray  Talk 03:28, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Another Comment The article is not an orphan, since she's also listed in United States Senate election in Florida, 2010. So maybe for my education, if being one of two women running, and running, and not being orphaned do not make one notable, what does? Llamabr (talk) 13:57, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello, llamabr. Is there any news coverage of her candidacy?   She certainly should be listed in United States Senate election in Florida, 2010, but without out any coverage of her, its kind of hard to have a verifiable article and show the notability of her individually.  Pretty much anyone (at least age 30 at time of oath) can file to run for the U.S. Senate, so filing to run by itself, and being of the female persuasion, isn't much to go on.--Milowent (talk) 18:41, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Being a candidate in a general election isn't sufficient, in and of itself, to confer notability on a person who loses the election and isn't already notable for other things — and she's not even that yet, she's merely a candidate in the party primary. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 16:37, 18 October 2009 (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.