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. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 18:54, 27 September 2019 (UTC) reply

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

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

Previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michele Martinez, the subject still fails to meet WP:POLITICIAN. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 13:18, 20 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 13:18, 20 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 13:22, 20 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 13:22, 20 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• Delete per consensus at the last AFD. I can't see what's changed to make her more notable per WP:POLITICIAN since then. Tracy Von Doom ( talk) 13:45, 20 September 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete. As a city council member, subject fails WP:NPOL. CASSIOPEIA^{( talk)} 13:55, 20 September 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Santa Ana is not a global city for the purposes of handing its city councillors an automatic free pass over WP:NPOL #2, so her only path into Wikipedia is to be referenceable to a depth and range and volume of reliable source coverage that marks her out as much more special than most other city councillors — but the ability to cite a handful of local coverage in her own local media market does not do that, because every city councillor everywhere can always show a handful of local coverage in their own local media market. People are also not notable for running as candidates in elections they did not win, so neither running for mayor nor running for the state legislature boosts her notability at all — and having been named in a "top 40" listicle is also not a notability claim in and of itself, so a 111-word blurb in the Huffington Post's "40 Under 40: Latinos in American Politics" is not the magic ticket either. Nothing stated in the article is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have a lot more than just one blurb of extralocal coverage. Bearcat ( talk) 14:43, 20 September 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete WP:NPOLITICIAN -- qedk ( t 桜 c) 20:44, 20 September 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete - fails both WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:38, 22 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 07:21, 24 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• Delete, largely per Bearcat: WP:NPOLITICIAN is clearly not met, which leaves WP:GNG, but GNG requires in depth coverage of the article's subject within (ideally at least a handful of) reliable, independent sources. The closest we have to in-depth coverage focused upon the proposed article's subject comes from the HuffPost article, and even that source contains merely a three sentence paragraph regarding Ms. Martinez. Unfortunately, despite the fact that there are technically nearly a dozen citation in the article, collectively, the content within them that is directed to the subject does not meet the notability threshold, even when we aggregate them. Further, if this is the second time we have had to delete the article in three years, we may want to consider salting the title. That would be a shame, in that its possible this woman's profile could raise in the coming years, and then there will be hoops to be jumped through to get a (then justified) article into existence, but given there is a possibility that the subject's supporters may re-add the article again without meeting notability standards, it may be called for. Snow ^{let's rap} 07:48, 26 September 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.