Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tanya De Mello: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Namtug (talk | contribs)
Namtug (talk | contribs)
Line 10: Line 10:


::I completely subscribe to your point of view, let me add some links bolstering the aforementioned qualities and if it is the prevailing viewpoint that the candidate does not yet warrant a page, I will fully adhere to the decision making process as set out. [[User:Namtug|Namtug]] ([[User talk:Namtug|talk]]) 15:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
::I completely subscribe to your point of view, let me add some links bolstering the aforementioned qualities and if it is the prevailing viewpoint that the candidate does not yet warrant a page, I will fully adhere to the decision making process as set out. [[User:Namtug|Namtug]] ([[User talk:Namtug|talk]]) 15:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I just cut some of the material and added more sources bolstering the De Mello's background in human rights work. Please let me know your thoughts. She is a person of importance in the Canadian context, hence the creation of this page. [[User:Namtug|Namtug]] ([[User talk:Namtug|talk]]) 17:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)





Revision as of 17:41, 1 September 2015

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

WP:BLP of a person notable primarily as an as yet unelected candidate in a forthcoming election, sourced entirely to a YouTube video of a TEDx talk and press releases, announcing her wins of non-notable internal university student body awards, on the websites of the universities she was educated at — these are all primary sources which cannot confer notability, and no reliable source coverage has been shown. This is effectively just a campaign brochure, which demonstrates no reason why she would have qualified for a Wikipedia article before being named as an electoral candidate — but if you cannot adequately demonstrate that, then the candidate does not become notable enough for a Wikipedia article until they win the election. Delete, without prejudice against recreation on October 19 if she wins her seat. Bearcat (talk) 16:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for starting this conversation and ensuring ongoing quality. I believe this is a worthy article, or else I would not have posted it in the first place. I will supplant some of the sources with one's of secondary nature, such as interviews, newspaper features, etc, to show that this individual - a veritable expert in human rights issues and community activist - may have a page. If there is too much information, I am not opposed to it being pared down significantly, especially with respect to student awards, etc, which do not speak to her general relevance. I will add reliable secondary sources and edit, but I think it is important to include political actors in the Canadian context, especially women of colour, to properly represent the Canadian political landscape and mosaic. Namtug (talk) 15:06, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear, our notability standards for politicians generally require that they have actually held a notable office. We don't give freebies to unelected candidates just because anyone likes their ideology, or because they belong to an underrepresented minority community — we have no institutional ideology, and are not a venue for public relations promotion of aspiring officeholders. We also don't confer notability on local community activists whose prominence is exclusively local to a single city — a person has to have a national profile to get over our notability standards for activists. You are correct that she might get over our notability standards for her human rights work, if she can be reliably sourced as having garnered substantive coverage for it — but nobody gets to claim an inclusion freebie just because they do important work, if the reliable sourcing isn't there to support it. Bearcat (talk) 16:04, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I completely subscribe to your point of view, let me add some links bolstering the aforementioned qualities and if it is the prevailing viewpoint that the candidate does not yet warrant a page, I will fully adhere to the decision making process as set out. Namtug (talk) 15:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just cut some of the material and added more sources bolstering the De Mello's background in human rights work. Please let me know your thoughts. She is a person of importance in the Canadian context, hence the creation of this page. Namtug (talk) 17:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 17:29, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Toffanin (talk) 17:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]