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. Michig ( talk) 10:14, 28 March 2019 (UTC) reply

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

Unsuccessful political candidate who does not appear to be notable for anything else. Grahame ( talk) 06:57, 21 March 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame ( talk) 07:01, 21 March 2019 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA( talk) 07:52, 21 March 2019 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 12:26, 21 March 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Fails WP:NPOL, several sentences come off WP:PROMO Bkissin ( talk) 20:09, 21 March 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. People do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates in elections they did not win — but this offers neither credible evidence that she had preexisting notability for other reasons independent of the candidacy, nor evidence that her candidacy received the unusual explosion of press coverage it would take to make her candidacy more special than everybody else's candidacies. Bearcat ( talk) 17:50, 27 March 2019 (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.