From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Spartaz Humbug! 07:30, 2 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Isa Infante (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Yet another campaign brochure for yet another unelected candidate in yet another future election — which, as always, is not a claim that passes WP:NPOL. This relies almost entirely on primary (party's own website) and user-generated (VoteSmart, Tumblr blogs) sources for referencing, with very little reliable source coverage to get her over WP:GNG. As usual, she'll be entitled to an article in November if she wins the election, but is not entitled to keep a poorly sourced campaign brochure on Wikipedia in the meantime. Delete. Bearcat ( talk) 04:13, 24 September 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — Mike moral ♪♫ 09:53, 24 September 2014 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions. — Mike moral ♪♫ 09:53, 24 September 2014 (UTC) reply

She passes the notability test. It should not be deleted, but marked as needs work. This is my first discuss, so please bear with me on technicalities. First, the article could use improvement, and I do not object to that. (I was planning on improving it days ago, but published it because I felt it met the minimal requirement. Then I had a personal issue to deal with, and probably won't have significant time until Monday.)

When I was writing Isa Infante's entry, I was focusing more on trying to adhere to biography rules but I had original sources, although I now realize I should have focused more on notability. It's my understanding notability is by subject, not content.

Isa Infante is a “Permanent” topic, relevant, and meets notability standards. The article does not warrant deletion because it meets minimal standards, does not break any rules, and does not cause any conflict.

Permanency is: 1) She is the first Green Party Gubernatorial candidate to be allowed on the ballot with the Green Party's name. (The Green Party has been in Federal Court since 2007 suing  the State of Tennessee for unconstitutional ballot access laws.) 2) She is also the first woman candidate for governor from the Green Party 3). She is a founding member of the Peace and Freedom Party in California . (Once I get more information I can add it to that page too. We have pictures, I was in the process of learning how to post pictures on Wikipedia just to get her profile picture up.)

Case # 3:13-cv-01128 document 30 filed 3-14-14 Green party of Tennessee vs Hargett but I wanted to go through and see if her name/address was on it.

The only other woman to run for Governor in TN (that I'm currently aware of ) is Kate Bradford Stockton born in the 1800s, ran about 1930 I think. ( https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1BLWA_enUS572US573&ion=1&espv=2&es_th=1&ie=UTF-8#q=kate%20bradford%20stockton)

Also worth noting is that Isa Infante is a Latino-African American - which adds to more "firsts."

I was first shocked by the Tumblr remark (and was in the process of writing “I would never cite Tumblr! Ever!”), then saw that I did, in fact, cite the Knoxville Journal's tumblr account. Although I plan on changing it I'd like to bring this up for discussion (maybe in a difference place, or has this been brought up before?) Does that mean you would also dismiss PBS on Tumblr if it was PBS's official account? Does the form/platform - book, magazine, newspaper, website all text, website image and text, or design make the source any less credible? Isn't PBS still PBS?

There have been news articles about Isa Infante throughout the last few decades, but a simple Google of her name and getting past the political stuff brings up results, however much of her work was in the 1970s, thus articles are archived or on microfiche. She is a founding member of the Peace and Freedom Party in California . (Once I get more information I can add it to that page too.) (I have to search archives for older ones.) That demonstrates there is interest in her, however Wikipedia says popularity is not a measure of notability. Her being a member of a task group under Jimmy Carter should be points towards notability, and that is in the article. In that position, she worked with the attorney who argued Roe vs. Wade (Sarah Weddington). (Though in by itself association isn't enough, but in context with the White House work it is.) She also has a published work that is referenced by others. ( http://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=5954947157107714008&as_sdt=5,43&sciodt=1,43&hl=en)

Also, only 3 out of the 13 citations were from the Green Party website and NONE were from her campaign website and NONE were from her social media websites. Just the facts, in a neutral tone. So Brad's statement "This relies almost entirely on primary (party's own website)" is false and should be removed from consideration.

Six (more than half of the remaining 10) are secondary sources. 3 of which are different newspapers, and 2 which are different notable educational institutions.

Four are votesmart - and I merely chose that because they conveniently had her work experience and education listed. (I had plans to condense those four) We did not submit any information to Votesmart at the time this Wiki article was made. I actually found Votesmart looking for sources, since what I had could have been challenged. (And knowing dirty politics in TN, that was likely to happen.) I've seen voter websites used before as references on Wikipedia. I read the biography and sources page and felt they were within standards. The site is recommended by New York Times, Bill Moyer and others. It is not opinionated, it is just work/job history.

Since notability is recognized and affirmed through court papers, I am requesting that you do not delete the article, but instead let it read that it needs work. And I request you excuse me at the moment for not putting all the Wiki links in about biography and all that because it's 2am, I have to go to bed, I have work to do before I do, and you know all that stuff anyhow. :) Thank you for your patience with a newbie! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.80.93.117 ( talk) 06:42, 26 September 2014 (UTC) reply

  • Delete Merely being a candidate for governor is not sufficient to show notability. 131.118.229.17 ( talk) 00:40, 1 October 2014 (UTC) reply
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.