Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jane Raybould

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 redirect to United States Senate election in Nebraska, 2018. If any editor is absolutely horrified that this article hasn't been deleted but redirected, feel free to land up on my talk page and give me a piece of your mind; I just might reverse the close (well, if you do it nicely). (non-admin closure) Lourdes 16:45, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jane Raybould

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This person is not notable per WP:GNG or WP:NPOL. She holds elected office, but not a major one covered by NPOL. She is running for federal office and has some coverage from that campaign, but not enough to establish notability beyond being a candidate for office. Most of the inline citations are to WP:PRIMARY sources, like her campaign website and the website for the Douglas County Democrats. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:56, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:56, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nebraska-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:56, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Preserve, as I believe that Raybould is a famous person as is. There are several articles about her (11 of which are cited in the Wikipedia page). She has a lot of influence over Nebraska, given that her family runs a chain of stores. If the page is ultimately deleted, I propose a new page be created in its place on the Raybould family, because the family arguably has the most importance in Nebraska, rather than just one person being a Senate Nominee. Moreover, per WP:NPOL, she has received significant press coverage as a politician (Lancaster County Commissioner and Lincoln City Councilwoman), as the aforementioned 11 articles convey. I would argue that she is a "Major local politician" given she has served one of the most populated cities/counties in Nebraska in two separate positions. Lastly, considering how many now-irrelevant U.S. Senate Nominees with no other political experience have pages on them (such as Lois Combs Weinberg and Dwight Grotberg, among dozens of others), there is no reason Jane Raybould should be removed. Redditaddict69 (talk) 01:14, 11 July 2018 (UTC)Redditaddict69[reply]
Redirect to the federal office election page - I think this is closer than most we redirect, but I can't find any good independent sources/articles on her to get her over the WP:GNG line. SportingFlyer talk 08:48, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is close, but there aren't enough good sources to cover this person fairly and coverage isn't WP:SUSTAINED. Perhaps WP:TOOSOON. I don't see a good merge candidate, so I think a redirect would be confusing for readers. Daask (talk) 14:29, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Lincoln NE isn't a global city for the purposes of making her notable as a city councillor, and being a non-winning candidate for higher office is not a notability freebie either — if she does not already have a strong claim of preexisting notability for other reasons, then she has to win election to a state or national office, not just be a candidate for it, to clear WP:NPOL. In extremely rare special cases, a candidate might receive so much media coverage that we keep her on pure WP:GNG grounds — but that doesn't automatically happen just because some campaign coverage exists, because some campaign coverage always exists for every candidate in every election. To pass GNG on pure "media coverage exists" grounds, the coverage has to mark her candidacy out as special for some reason, like the explosion of international coverage that Christine O'Donnell got which has managed to make her article twice as long and three times as well-sourced as the article about the actual senator she lost to. But more than half of the references here are primary sources that do not support notability at all, and once those are taken out of the equation the media coverage left over is not enough to make her more special than every other candidate everywhere else. Bearcat (talk) 16:03, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. Maybe a section could be created in the United States Senate election in Nebraska, 2018 page. It would at least need to outline who Raybould was in the election, such as her position in Nebraska as a businessowner and a Democrat running as a sleeper candidate. Or, a Sleeper candidate page could be created, with Raybould's name in as an example. Redditaddict69 (talk) 18:02, 11 July 2018 (UTC)Redditaddict69[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:59, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Preserve^. (Struck revote.) Going back to my original comment on preserving the article, Gary Trauner is another Congressional Nominee with no other major political experience with a page on Wikipedia. Redditaddict69 (talk) 03:47, 14 July 2018 (UTC)Redditaddict69[reply]

Please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Nothing stops anybody from trying to create an article about absolutely anything or anybody who exists at all, so the existence of any article about a superficially similar topic is never in and of itself a valid reason why another article gets a guaranteed inclusion freebie. Gary Trauner, in fact, may need to be deleted as well — but his inclusion or exclusion is irrelevant to whether Jane Raybould qualifies or not, because each article is evaluated on its own merits or lack thereof: "if he has an article then she has to have an article too" is not a thing. Also, you do not get to revote more than once: you can comment as many times as you like, but you do not get to preface any further comments with a bolded restatement of the vote you've already given. Bearcat (talk) 14:02, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the only claim to notablity is being a member of the Lincoln city council, but Lincoln is not a big enough city to make members of the city council default notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:46, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As the major party nominee for a US Senate election, Raybould should have a well-sourced and factually correct page so that voters have the ability to make an informed decision. Narayansg (talk) 23:28, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place to post election information. SportingFlyer talk 16:24, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to United States Senate election in Nebraska, 2018. This is the usual and appropriate outcome for candidates for federal office. Much of the data on the subject's page is already on the election page. --Enos733 (talk) 05:40, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Views currently split between "delete" and "redirect" - see if a compromise can be reached
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:29, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator comment In AfD's like this, I often comment that I would be fine with a redirect to the relevant target article. I didn't in this nomination, but I would indeed have no problem with a redirect. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:04, 18 July 2018 (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.