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. Kurykh ( talk) 00:41, 2 March 2017 (UTC) reply

Manka Dhingra (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:POLOUTCOMES. While deep biographical information is contained in RS, WP:POLOUTCOMES establishes that merely being a political candidate does not confer notability unless some other significant criteria is met. Being a local county deputy prosecutor does not meet WP:GNG. Her "controversial comments about women" appears to have only gained traction in a neighborhood weekly newspaper and also don't rise to GNG. DarjeelingTea ( talk) 23:45, 22 February 2017 (UTC) reply

• Keep I appreciate your concern about the Manka Dhingra article, and there are areas that need improvements (See edits). The Manka Dhingra page meets notability criteria because of the nature of the race she is involved in. The special election she is running in is going to be the most expensive race in Washington state this year. In 2014, the 45th district state senate race cost more than $3 million, which is more expensive than many congressional campaigns across the country. ^[1]. Additionally, more than 50,000 people voted in the 2014 election for this state senate seat. ^[2] Lastly, the seat Manka Dhingra is looking to fill also will determine the balance of power in the Washington State Senate. I recommend that this page should not be deleted. WASkier ( talk) 00:57, 23 February 2017 (UTC) reply

WASkier - thanks for providing such a thorough explanation and rationale. I'm still somewhat on the fence as this is still just a local legislative race, regardless of how much money it's expected might be spent on it. That said, if there's even a modicum of support for Keep from other editors, I'll withdraw my nomination. DarjeelingTea ( talk) 01:46, 23 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 02:43, 23 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 02:43, 23 February 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete. Being a political candidate does not confer notability. Spending money on a campaign does not confer notability. Every political candidate receives local media attention (that's a big part of the media's job), but that is merely routine information for voters – it does not provide notability because it is temporary WP:NOTTEMPORARY. My response to all political candidate articles where the candidate was not previously notable: win the election first, then we discuss this. WP:NOTPROMO. Jack N. Stock ( talk) 06:32, 23 February 2017 (UTC) reply
• Delete Being an unelected candidate for office does not equate to notability per WP:NPOL nor does receiving local media attention and nor does campaign spending. AusLondonder ( talk) 22:00, 23 February 2017 (UTC) reply
• Delete per WP:POLOUTCOMES. - -- Enos733 ( talk) 04:56, 24 February 2017 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Fails WP:GNG, WP:POLOUTCOMES. I agree being a candidate does not confer notability. And the weekly neighborhood paper is not the wide-spread coverage about her, and not just the event, that GNG requires. SW3 5DL ( talk) 19:17, 24 February 2017 (UTC) reply
• Delete political candidates at this level are non-notable. If she is elected she will be notable, but not until then. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 20:31, 25 February 2017 (UTC) reply
• Delete - Fails WP:POLOUTCOMES and WP:GNG. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:38, 1 March 2017 (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.