Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siân Gwenllian

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. If anyone wishes to retrieve it following the election, please see WP:REFUND. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 19:13, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Siân Gwenllian

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

I don't think this person meets WP:POLITICIAN. Simply standing as a Plaid candidate is not sufficient, unless she wins the seat and gets in. Being a councillor is not especially significant as there are so many of them, and the level of news coverage is sufficient for me to think we should err on the side of caution with this one. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:02, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 13:44, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 13:44, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now. We'll probably have to recreate the article in a few weeks' time, but POLITICIAN is clear that candidacy and local government do not confer notability. Frinton100 (talk) 21:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Local government does not confer an automatic WP:NPOL pass on every local councillor who exists, being an as yet unelected candidate for higher office doesn't boost her includability at all, and the only source here is a primary source profile on her own political party's website — and even a politician who has a clean NPOL claim still doesn't get to keep that kind of article based on that kind of sourcing. No prejudice against recreation if she wins the seat in the upcoming election, but nothing here gets her an article today. Bearcat (talk) 21:37, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Ran a Proquest search just to check, a couple of hundred articles about her, sehe is clearly a very competent politician, stepped down from her cabinet her job running the schools, youth services in the 3-county region (pop. ~172,000) to run. As Finton100 says, the article will very likely have to be recreated after the polls close.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:58, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Given she's contesting prime Plaid Cymru territory, perhaps it would make more sense to draft / userfy the article, until the election's over? I recall a similar thing happening to Mhairi Black; you could almost pinpoint the precise moment at the 2015 General Election where she went from borderline speedy to obvious WP:POLITICIAN. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:03, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bearcat, can that be done? There's an obvious functionality to it.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:00, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's absolutely an option as well. However, I foresee the definite danger that if we do that, it will be deemed as establishing a precedent that any premature article about an as-yet-unelected candidate for office can always be kept in draftspace pending the results of the election — so then draftspace would turn into exactly the repository of campaign brochures for political candidates that we're trying to prevent mainspace from becoming. So it's worth remembering that we do also have the option of simply restoring the deleted article after election day if she wins, which runs a lot less risk of setting a dangerous precedent. Bearcat (talk) 21:08, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Bearcat here. I was going to make a similar suggestion myself, but then thought of the issue of setting a precedent. I don't think we should go down this road for precisely the reasons Bearcat outlined. Far better to delete for now, and then restore if/when necessary. Frinton100 (talk) 23:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for falling so neatly into my little trap, which I hope was not quite an abuse because it was also a sincere question. I wanted to hear you say it so that I could add it to WP:POLOUTCOMES, which I have found to be a very useful resource.E.M.Gregory (talk) 02:04, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bearcat walks away muttering under his breath Bearcat (talk) 03:25, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the election article. Should she lose, this is what we'd do anyway. Should she win, undoing it will be easy. In the mean time, we avoid the potential of having a keep-as-draft precedent. Either way, her name is a good search target; there wouldn't be anything wrong with creating this title as a redirect to the election if someone hadn't yet created it already. Nyttend (talk) 02:57, 25 February 2016 (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.