- 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. Sandstein 16:40, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
- Niki Lundquist ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-elected and not otherwise notable politician. WP:NPOL. Madg2011 ( talk) 02:32, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario -related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere talk 04:20, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere talk 04:20, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women -related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere talk 04:21, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
- Delete does not pass WP:GNG nor does she pass WP:POLITICIAN. SportingFlyer talk 04:30, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Not notable just by being a candidate. Acnetj ( talk) 08:50, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. People do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates in elections they haven't won yet — if you cannot demonstrate and properly source that she was already notable enough for an article for some other reason besides her candidacy itself, then she has to win the election and thereby hold the office, not just run as a candidate, to become notable as a politician. But this makes no strong claim of preexisting notability at all. No prejudice against recreation after election day if she wins, but nothing here entitles her to already have an article today. Bearcat ( talk) 21:11, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
- Ms. Lundquist is a public official and her reputation goes beyond being a candidate in an election. She's been interviewed on CTV News and been in other news articles for her work as a Unifor lawyer, most famously when the Human Rights Tribunal sided with her in a case of 2 Mexican women being exploited by a business owner in Canada (interview with CTV News can be found
here). Given her work and exposure on major news networks, in addition to her running for elected office, I believe there is sufficient grounds to keep the article. -
Matticus333 (
talk) 21:54, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
- People do not get Wikipedia articles for being interviewed by the media, either: if she's speaking about herself in the interview, then she's making unverified self-published claims that haven't necessarily been fact-checked for accuracy, and if she's speaking about something else then she fails to be the subject of the coverage in question. So no, appearing as a talking head on the news is neither a notability claim in and of itself, nor coverage about her for the purposes of getting her over WP:GNG. Bearcat ( talk) 01:28, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
- Ms. Lundquist is a public official and her reputation goes beyond being a candidate in an election. She's been interviewed on CTV News and been in other news articles for her work as a Unifor lawyer, most famously when the Human Rights Tribunal sided with her in a case of 2 Mexican women being exploited by a business owner in Canada (interview with CTV News can be found
here). Given her work and exposure on major news networks, in addition to her running for elected office, I believe there is sufficient grounds to keep the article. -
Matticus333 (
talk) 21:54, 19 April 2018 (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.