Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dai Le

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. I will be willing to userfy on request, or alternatively to undelete if she wins an election. JohnCD (talk) 20:11, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dai Le

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

Subject's only claim to fame is that of being an unsuccessful political candidate. Her race should not be an issue. As per numerous discussions at WP:AUSTRALIA, including this one, this doesn't demonstrate sufficient notability. AussieLegend (talk) 10:07, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Cannot find any significant sources about this person. --90.194.241.55 (talk) 10:54, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as lacking a sufficient claim of notability. Disavian (talk) 16:18, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 01:32, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - meets WP:GNG. Has received ongoing coverage in reliable sources. (if this is deleted, could this be moved to userspace?) Hack (talk) 07:50, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Most failed political candidates, including me, have received significant coverage in reliable sources. However, all knowledge of the subject is the result of the failed candidacy. We could fill Wikipedia with bios on political candidates, but we don't. This one also fails WP:POLITICIAN. --AussieLegend (talk) 12:40, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - A person can be notable under WP:GNG despite failing a subject-specific notability guideline. Hack (talk) 01:27, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed they can, but this person isn't. Of the citations now in the article:

1-5, 7, 12, 14 & 15 relate directly to her candidacies

6 is dead

8 is a mention about her film-making, but it quickly slips into mention of her failed candidacies

9 is a list of multiple award winners, in which her name is mentioned only once with no discussion

10 is a simple mention of the award mentioned in 9, with mention of her candidacy

11 is a brief description of her position on the Ethnic Communities Council, published by Ethnic Communities Council on its website. However this is no more mention than other members of the committee get.[1]

13 includes a very brief mention of her as a guest speaker in an article that doesn't significantly address her.

16 mostly mentions her failed candidacy

There simply isn't the significant coverage required by WP:GNG outside of her failed candidacies. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:08, 14 May 2012 (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.