- 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. with a side of IAR reflective of consensus. It is already the 17th in Australia and she is slated to be elected on the 21st. Given the duration of this AfD, it would be process wonkery to draftify this for four days to enforce consensus on NPOL. Star Mississippi 01:56, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Linda White (politician) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This subject currently fails to meet WP:NPOL and WP:GNG the coverage so far has only that she is running to replace a currently serving senator or listings of her on her previous positions. McMatter ( talk)/( contrib) 00:31, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Politics, and Australia. McMatter ( talk)/( contrib) 00:31, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Linda White is virtually guaranteed to win election to the Senate, so at worst this article is published prematurely. This is a proportional representation election and she is the first candidate on her party's list, which is a major party. The candidate will unequivocally meet NPOL unless she dies, and even then may still meet notability as an elected deceased person.
Onetwothreeip (
talk)
01:14, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Commment I agree with the nominator that the subject probably doesn't meet notability. But I came here to basically say the same thing that the person above has said: even taking WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NOTYET into account, this person will almost certainly become notable in only 3 weeks' time, so it feels like a bad idea to delete it now, only to resurrect it in 3 weeks' time. But obviously undeleting articles is easy, so we can still delete it now I suppose. Dr. Vogel ( talk) 01:20, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. Basically in agreement with the above. She's not notable now, we shouldn't encourage articles to be created prematurely like this, but at the same time this is a bit of a waste of time given just how guaranteed her election is. Draftify for a few weeks, I guess. Frickeg ( talk) 01:48, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:47, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Draftify seems like a good WP:ATD in this case. - Kj cheetham ( talk) 15:59, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment More or less cutting and pasting my comment as at Cassandra Fernando .... Australia's federal election is less than three weeks away, for which this person is a candidate and barring death and/or an extinction-level event will be elected. On election, presumed notability will be accorded. Against that, deleting the article this close to the election creates attention in and of itself. If this was a minor party candidate, I would be less concerned and agree with strict application of the GNG ... but I think an 18-day suspension here is not unreasonable. Does the risk of drawing attention by deletion/draftifying outweigh the zero impact to this encyclopedia of waiting 18 days? Regards, -- Goldsztajn ( talk) 11:37, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
- How is it zero impact? Don't you think readers would like to read about a future senator?
ITBF (
talk)
11:01, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- @ ITBF Sorry, my phrasing was not very clear! I was trying to say there's zero impact on the encyclopedia keeping the article, whereas there's actually a risk in deleting it. We agree. :) Regards, Goldsztajn ( talk) 11:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- So... close and draftify now per WP:SNOW ? Dr. Vogel ( talk) 23:10, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. The arguments to draftify and re-create in a couple weeks are frankly ridiculous and are depriving readers of information for no purpose. Creating articles for safe seats is the standard for U.S. politics articles as nomination is tantamount to election. Numerous articles on 2022 election candidates have already been created -
Allegra Spender,
Monique Ryan - who are much less likely to be elected, not sure why this is being singled out.
ITBF (
talk)
11:04, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- @
ITBF: Spender and Ryan are notable as candidates, while Linda White and Cassandra Fernando aren't notable as candidates.
Onetwothreeip (
talk)
00:50, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- Also note WP:OTHERSTUFF. - Kj cheetham ( talk) 10:09, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- @
ITBF: Spender and Ryan are notable as candidates, while Linda White and Cassandra Fernando aren't notable as candidates.
Onetwothreeip (
talk)
00:50, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep in 15+ years, going with my first WP:IAR. Regards, -- Goldsztajn ( talk) 11:26, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- Draftify To enforce the consensus that Wikipedia should not be used as free campaign advertising for otherwise non-notable individuals. Note:my opinion was edited, replaced and removed in
this edit by
ITBF
AusLondonder (
talk)
15:07, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not giving anyone "free campaign advertising" and you going around to multiple articles implying I have a political bias is uncalled for.
ITBF (
talk)
16:06, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- @
ITBF: Are you serious? You removed my comments on purpose?
AusLondonder (
talk)
21:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- @ AusLondonder Looking at the edit history, it appears to me as a genuine mistake, not unreasonable to AGF here. @ ITBF Perhaps be a little more careful in how you craft your replies being conscious to preserve previous contribution and FWIW I didn't read AUsLondoner's comments as accusing you of political bias, again, AGF here. Kind regards, Goldsztajn ( talk) 21:22, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- @
ITBF: Are you serious? You removed my comments on purpose?
AusLondonder (
talk)
21:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not giving anyone "free campaign advertising" and you going around to multiple articles implying I have a political bias is uncalled for.
ITBF (
talk)
16:06, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to
2022 Australian federal election as an interim place for the subject. There is not a consensus for creating articles for candidates in safe seats in the US (violates
WP:Crystal) - instead a redirect is a usual and appropriate outcome. --
Enos733 (
talk)
17:22, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- Crystal allows for the creation of articles where the issue at hand is notable and almost certain to happen. I've not looked particularly thoroughly, but quickly found two US House members whose articles were created prior to their election in safe districts:
Donald Payne Jr and
Trent Kelly. Regards,
Goldsztajn (
talk)
01:27, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Kelly was redirected until the election (see talk page). Also not everything gets sent to Afd. -
Enos733 (
talk)
16:58, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- The history shows in one the redirect was contested. In the other it stayed. I'm only highlighting that "There is not a consensus for creating articles for candidates in safe seats in the US" does not appear to be correct. We don't have a consensus for anything on this matter, rather lots of different practices...which is perfectly Wikipedia of us. Regards, Goldsztajn ( talk) 00:56, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- Kelly was redirected until the election (see talk page). Also not everything gets sent to Afd. -
Enos733 (
talk)
16:58, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Crystal allows for the creation of articles where the issue at hand is notable and almost certain to happen. I've not looked particularly thoroughly, but quickly found two US House members whose articles were created prior to their election in safe districts:
Donald Payne Jr and
Trent Kelly. Regards,
Goldsztajn (
talk)
01:27, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Draftify. It is the principle - she is not notable yet. Spinifex&Sand ( talk) 02:06, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need consensus on whether the subject passes the existing policies to secure the article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless ( talk) 18:15, 9 May 2022 (UTC)- @
Less Unless: How long can we expect this discussion continue to be open for? The subject will be elected to a national legislature in ten days.
Onetwothreeip (
talk)
23:15, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- As there's no consensus on the notability so the article has been relisted for 7 more days. Less Unless ( talk) 09:52, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- @
Less Unless: How long can we expect this discussion continue to be open for? The subject will be elected to a national legislature in ten days.
Onetwothreeip (
talk)
23:15, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Given that she's certain to be elected on the 21st and this now won't be closed before at the latest the 18th, this is becoming particularly silly levels of moot. The Drover's Wife ( talk) 12:05, 14 May 2022 (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.