Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/New Hampshire

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to New Hampshire. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|New Hampshire|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to New Hampshire. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to US.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


New Hampshire

[edit]

Lily Tang Williams

[edit]
Lily Tang Williams (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable congressional candidate. Winning a U.S. House primary does not entitle someone to a Wikipedia page, and I don't see how she passes GNG. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 18:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator here, I would support a redirect to that page. This will be be her most high-profile run for office, clearly trumping her 2022 run for this district where she lost in the primary and her 2016 Colorado Senate bid where she took 3% of the vote. The 2024 page is the best redirect target. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 21:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oof, I forgot that she has lost multiple elections. I don't know where the best redirect target would be, but if you think it's best for 2024, I'll defer to you. Bkissin (talk) 15:49, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep
There's quite a few sources about her immigration/escape from China, if that matters, such as:
Interview with John Stossel 6 years ago:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxMWs8RyLLI:
https://thepoliticswatcher.com/pages/articles/congress/2024/9/10/lily-tang-williams-republican-candidate-unique-perspective
https://bunewsservice.com/lily-tang-williams-living-the-american-dream/
https://www.heritage.org/asia/heritage-explains/lily-tang-williams-growing-communist-china
From UK (though the Daily Mail is marginal):
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13146007/lily-tang-williams-congressional-candidate-republican-biden-border.html
From Japan:
https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2024/01/5f210f5b6a3e-focus-asian-americans-voice-reasons-they-back-republicans-in-new-hampshire.html
And actually being in a debate with a sitting Senator as a Libertarian, which pretty much has never happened ("In a first, Libertarian candidate in Colorado’s U.S. Senate race qualifies for major debate"):
https://www.denverpost.com/2016/09/06/lily-tang-williams-libertarian-candidate-colorados-us-senate-debate/
https://www.denverpost.com/2016/09/08/what-lily-tang-williams-said-colorado-libertarian-u-s-senate/
https://www.dailycamera.com/2016/10/15/lily-tang-williams-us-senate/
Colorado Public Radio:
https://www.cpr.org/show-segment/childhood-in-china-shapes-libertarian-senate-candidates-vision-for-colorado-country/
I'm not sure if Fox News is considered a credible source, but there's more about her & China:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/survivor-maos-political-purge-getting-ptsd-watching-scary-history-repeat-college-campuses
https://www.foxnews.com/media/chinese-immigrant-running-congress-fears-marxism-followed-us-witnessing-youth-indoctrination
https://nypost.com/2024/05/15/us-news/survivor-of-maos-political-purge-getting-ptsd-watching-history-repeat-on-college-campuses/
More about China and the gun control debate with David Hogg:
https://www.westernjournal.com/watch-gun-control-activist-david-hogg-torched-ccp-survivor-go-china-see-gun-control-works/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.147.125.13 (talk) 22:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"thepoliticswatcher.com" is a random site that does not help to establish notability. Same for bunewsservice which is a college newspaper. The Heritage Foundation is not a news outlet and I shouldn't have to explain why that one doesn't count. Daily Mail is considered a deprecated source, while Fox News, Western Journal, and the New York Post are considered "generally unreliable." Getting invited to a debate is interesting but certainly not proof that she deserves a Wikipedia page. Sometimes third-party candidates get invited to a debate, it's not that rare. The Kyodo News and Reason sources are decent, but I stand by my judgment that she's not notable. Rising somewhat above the level of a random congressional candidate is not enough for a Wikipedia page. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 04:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since when are college newspapers not considered valid supporting sources? Heritage Foundation may not be a news outlet but its not deprecated and a highly influential conservative think tank. "Generally" unreliable sources need to be analyzed in totality not in part, so if there are 3 "generally" unreliable sources, a rational determination needs to be made as to whether the small part of them that is reliable is strong enough to create notability. Wickster12345 (talk) 04:30, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here's an academic journal reference where she appears: "Academic Marxism in the Crosshairs: What is at Stake in the U.S.?" in Class, Race and Corporate Power, Vol. 12, No. 1 (2024). https://www.jstor.org/stable/48771892 216.147.125.142 (talk) 15:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean when you say she "looks notable" BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 14:36, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
means it is notable. Mysecretgarden (talk) 17:57, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What? I'm asking you *why* you think she's notable BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 18:47, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I assume they meant for the same reasons as noted by SineBot, as they also said: “…has enough news coverage as indicated above”.
Do you, BottleOfChocolateMilk, have any response to what SineBot had to say, as they are the one whose argument seems to inspiring the majority of “Keep” votes Wickster12345 (talk) 22:46, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Uh...yes? I directly replied to their message right after they posted it. Also, that message was not posted by SineBot, it was posted by an IP user. SineBot is the bot that automatically adds a signature to people who don't sign their comments. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 01:12, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being an unelected candidate for office does not automatically make someone notable; see WP:NPOL. Also, calling NH-02 a "swing district" is a stretch. Every major election forecaster has it rated as Likely or Safe D. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 01:12, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But like a previously stated, that was a minor detail. She has recieved significant media coverage and does represent a district that very well could swing her way in 2024. Also, I know we’re not supposed to compare certain cases to each other, but there have been numerous other instances of less notable people in 2024 with Wikipedia articles. NathanBru (talk)
  • Keep because she has recieved substantial media coverage from major news outlets for both her 2022 and 2024 runs and has appeared in a documentary (The Great Awakening). 1980RWR (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 02:50, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep for the reasons listed above. She has received substantial media coverage for her 2022 and 2024 congressional campaigns and for her 2016 U.S. Senate campaign as a Libertarian, has appeared in documentaries, and has been interviewed by national media organizations like Fox News and Newsmax. There's also precedent for people equally and even less significant than Lily Tang Williams having a Wikipedia article. George Hansel is a former small town mayor who unsuccessfully ran for Congress once and now hosts a regional talk show (the station that hosts Hansel's show is so small that it doesn't even broadcast to me, and I live in New Hampshire only an hour away from Keene); Hansel is arguably no more significant than any other local politician, yet considering his article has existed for nearly 3 years without issue, there seems to be no question that he is worthy of a Wikipedia article. Lily Tang Williams is much more significant than Hansel and I would argue that she just as deserving of a Wikipedia article, if not more so, than him. Eureka640 (talk) 03:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 16:05, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, then ignore the Hansel argument. The fact still remains that she has been the subject of much media coverage over the past decade for her Libertarian activism and congressional candidacies, including interviews on major national news stations. Eureka640 (talk) 18:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, WP:GNG is met through the sheer number of sources (per above). Microplastic Consumer (talk) 14:37, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FYi, it was missed that she has been in Fox News on multiple occasions, another extremely notable source. NathanBru (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A source evaluation table would be really helpful here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:29, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This shouldn't be relisted. There was enough discussion. Nine keeps and three redirects. There are plenty of legit sources listed. None of the actual content itself has been disputed.
Even if there wasn't a clear enough consensus in your mind:
"When discussions of proposals to delete articles, media, or other pages end without consensus, the normal result is the content being kept"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus#No_consensus
"relisting should not be a substitute for a no consensus closure".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_process#Relisting_discussions
Making an evaluation table is just tedious work. If you think it would be helpful to have the table, you should create it yourself. 216.147.123.209 (talk) 12:05, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/New_Hampshire&oldid=1246697951"