Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heidi Behrens-Benedict
- 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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 17:34, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Heidi Behrens-Benedict (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Does not meet WP:NOTE. This page, for a former candidate, does not use references- the campaign page is a deadlink. Additionally, there is no text other than four sentences about not winning. DerRichter (talk) 08:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and tag for improvement and sourcing. There is a lot of coverage even for an "also-ran" in reliable sources that pass WP:N: Google Search, Google News. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 03:01, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Can I get a reason for how this passes notability? I have read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes#People and WP:POLITICIAN, and neither gives a reason for why Heidi Behrens-Benedict should be notable just because she ran for office. Please read these before responding. According to your google searches, she is an interior designer, so I'm not understanding why else she should be notable. --DerRichter (talk) 08:26, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as nominator. --DerRichter (talk) 08:26, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom.Nrswanson (talk) 11:10, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. -- raven1977 (talk) 05:46, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- raven1977 (talk) 05:46, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as non-notable local political candidate. Jclemens (talk) 06:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete just another political candidate who lost four different elections, but not in any kind of notable fashion. coccyx bloccyx(toccyx) 18:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Major party nominees for Congress are per se notable. Kestenbaum (talk) 20:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This is certainly more notable than Duff Beer. -75.171.190.1 (talk) 00:49, 22 October 2008 (UTC) — 75.171.190.1 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- Delete unsuccessful candidates do not meet WP:BIO for politicians. Valenciano (talk) 07:52, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If so, that rule needs to change, at least as to major candidates for President and Congress. Kestenbaum (talk) 15:52, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please explain this, because according to the links I provided earlier (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes#People and WP:POLITICIAN), Heidi Behrens-Benedict is not inherently notable. Read the part that says: Candidates for a national legislature are not viewed as having inherent notability. She has not held any office or done anything notable outside of political candidacy. I'm not sure from which Wikipedia policy you are getting your arguments. --DerRichter (talk) 17:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'm not sure how I can say this more clearly. I reject that policy statement, stated as baldly as that. I do very much agree that not every candidate for a national legislature is notable, especially minor party and write-in candidates. But major party
candidatesnominees are surely notable, and the policy should be amended to reflect this. Kestenbaum (talk) 14:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'm not sure how I can say this more clearly. I reject that policy statement, stated as baldly as that. I do very much agree that not every candidate for a national legislature is notable, especially minor party and write-in candidates. But major party
- Please explain this, because according to the links I provided earlier (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes#People and WP:POLITICIAN), Heidi Behrens-Benedict is not inherently notable. Read the part that says: Candidates for a national legislature are not viewed as having inherent notability. She has not held any office or done anything notable outside of political candidacy. I'm not sure from which Wikipedia policy you are getting your arguments. --DerRichter (talk) 17:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If so, that rule needs to change, at least as to major candidates for President and Congress. Kestenbaum (talk) 15:52, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Current practice certainly seems to be that major party candidates for national offices (like Congress) are notable. RayAYang (talk) 18:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- And while I do not mean to offend, is this "seeming" just a feeling you have, or is there a basis for your statement? In other words, can you show instead of just telling? Thanks. --SeinHenker (talk) 20:57, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Certainly. Please see the recently closed AfD at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gerry_Connolly, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Monty_Lankford, for the most recent examples. My understanding is that this is a relatively recent shift, and people are certainly free to disagree. But I think Wikipedia is not paper, and major party candidates should have articles. RayAYang (talk) 22:19, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Non-notable politician. Simply being a candidate does not grant notability. TN‑X-Man 13:33, 23 October 2008 (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.