Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruth Cameron (2nd nomination)

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, even after discounting ballot-stuffing. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 19:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ruth Cameron

ATTENTION! If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a ballot, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting heads. You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! Note: Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username|UTC timestamp [optional]}}

Already deleted Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ruth_Cameron, simply recreated with even less information. Seems a non-notable individual. Jefffire 22:12, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - everything in the article seems verifiable, I'm just not sure being third on the Scottish Green Party's candidate list is notable. Yomangani^talk 22:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Keep - I'm not convinced about her notability (the question of her being elected is pertinent, as it would establish notability above and beyond other claims), but at worst it is borderline and WP:BIO is only a guideline. Since MichaelMcNab seems committed to maintaining and expanding the article, and since if she is elected we would undoubtedly see the article recreated (but perhaps having lost MichaelMcNab after we bit him on his first contribution), I choose to ignore all rules. Yomangani^talk 11:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• • Comment The top two on the list are already MSPs, so if the green vote increases in 2007, which isn't too implausible, she would be elected. Note that the Scottish Green Party does not stand candidates in the individual first past the post constituencies. Catchpole 06:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Given the notability of Edinburgh University Students' Association, it seems odd to disallow the Presidents of that organisation. This before one considers that Cameron is the Scottish head of one of the UK's largest NGO coalitions, and, as noted above, a politician with a high likelihood of winning in a national election in less than a year's time. More info would be nice, but that seems an argument for expanding, rather than removing, the article. - Alec Davison

Being a member of the Scotish parliment does not make one notable. Only a limited number of it's members have articles. Being merely third on the list for the proportional representation system for a region of Scotland makes one even more non-notable. Jefffire 11:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment - I disagree, MSPs are notable in my eyes. The Scottish parliament is a body with siginificant powers. As this lady is not yet even an MSP though, I'm neutral here. - fchd 11:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, as far as I am aware, all MSPs have articles. Catchpole 11:30, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Mostly, scratch that comment. This individual still not notable. I'm guessing it was put up by friends. Jefffire 11:39, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

But not all potential candidates, surely? I'm currently of the opinion to delete because she is an ex-President of the Student Union (her previous article was deleted when she was the President) and apart from having a job, her only claim to fame is being on the candidate list. If she is elected, I wouldn't have any reservations about an article on her. Yomangani^talk 11:40, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi. When I created this article, I had no idea that one had existed before. However, I do think that Cameron is worthy of inclusion given, as Alec Davison points out, that she is the head of a national NGO coalition. She is a well-known and increasingly important figure in Scottish civic society. As regards her public notability, she was the subject of a full-page profile article in the Sunday Herald Magazine of 13th August this year (sadly not online). I like to think that Wikipedia provides access to wider information than national newspapers; it certainly should not be providing less than them. MichaelMcNab 12:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment - you can add the Sunday Herald article as a reference if you've read it, there's no policy that demands all sources must be available online. I'm open to persuasion and I'll change my opinion if there is some evidence of her notability. Stop Climate Chaos Scotland doesn't seem to get much press as far as I can see, and the "Climate Change Ambassador" role doesn't even mention the name of the project, making it hard to check her notability. Yomangani^talk 12:38, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment - I've specified the Climate Change College project by name (an oversight on my part; apologies), and added the external link. I'd be grateful if others could help me with citing sources, as I haven't quite got my head around the style and code. The profile piece is 'I recycle, I use energy-efficient light bulbs and my last gas bill was £1.17' by Vicky Allan, page 7, Sunday Herald Magazine, 13th August 2006. The source for her selection on the 2007 election list is today's Edinburgh Evening News. It is also in the print edition of the paper, but I'm afraid I don't know the page number. MichaelMcNab 13:33, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Another mistake by me - the Sunday Herald piece is online. MichaelMcNab 13:39, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I've cited those sources. Yomangani^talk 16:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks! MichaelMcNab 17:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

• I'd say don't delete. As has been mentioned, She is the head of a major coalition of NGOs in Scotland, a recent high profile student politician, and likely MSP. Adam Ramsay
• Don't Delete - Wikipedia has lots of 'ex-'politicians of one sort or another, so being an ex-student leader shouldn't be decisive. Wikipedia also has lots of considerably more minor political figures - including almost the entire central committee of the UK Socialist Workers Party (not even a parliamentary party) and numerous internal figures from the Scottish Socialist Party who are only of interest to leftish political anoraks. While I agree that third on the Lothians list makes Ruth a player in the upcoming elections, the key thing is her high profile in Scotland through student and NGO activity, to which various people have alluded. Ian

Comment User has < 10 edits. :) Dlohcierekim 14:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Don't delete - What is undeniably notable is that Ms Cameron has in the past couple of years become one of the most well known young politicians in Scotland amongst, in particular, the student politics circles. Her stint as Edinburgh Uni President was very high profile, and her then moving on from that straight into a very high profile NGO post and candidacy for a potentially winnable MSP seat definitely counts as worthy of interest. In short she is 'one to watch' and hence it is fitting that she have a Wiki article. PhylSM 17:33, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment These people appear to be colleages of the individual in question, creating accounts in order to vote. Afd are discussion between editors, not a vote. Jefffire 18:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Keep arguments not convincing when based on potential future achievements. "One to watch" for future notability means she is not now and may never be notable enough to meet inclusion criteria. She isn't yet a MSP. Maybe she will be elected next year. Maybe she will then be notable. Including her now couldn't possibly help her name recognition and help her attain that which she seeks? Wikipedia is not free publicity for those seeking elected office. :) Dlohcierekim 21:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment I think you overestimate the powers of this website =) Catchpole 21:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment I dunno. My user id gets 16,000 Google hits. LOL, Cheers and happy editing. :) Dlohcierekim 00:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete CSD G4, unless im missing somthing. Musaabdulrashid 06:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC) No opinion then. Musaabdulrashid 05:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment - G4 refers to a copy that is "substantially identical and not merely a new article on the same subject", so doesn't apply here. Yomangani^talk 09:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment - Although I've included Cameron as a civic society, rather than political, figure, I would argue that there is a substantial public interest in including election candidates on Wikipedia. For many, it will be the only source of information about aperson that you are being asked to vote for that is not a spun party press release or website. Providing this sort of information to voters is an excellent example of the value of Wikipedia.

That argument aside, as I say, Cameron is a Scottish civic society figure of note. She is the head of one of Scotland's most significant NGO coalitions, counting Friends of the Earth Scotland, WWF Scotland and the RSPB (itself one of the country's largest membership organisations) as members. Before taking up this role, she was a student leader of national significance, not just another run-of-the-mill union officer (and, having been to a run-of-the-mill university myself, I'm under no illusions as to the notability of those), as evidenced by the national press coverage of her tenure (search for "ruth cameron" at The Scotsman). She is now known by name and reputation to everyone of importance in the Scottish campaigning sector.

I'm a little surprised at the debate over Cameron's likelihood of election; it seems perverse and blinkered to say that a civic society leader becomes notable if and only if he or she is elected to parliament.

Over the next few weeks I hope to be able to add more detail to this article as well as, if permitted by the Wikipedia community, new articles for Stop Climate Chaos Scotland and other NGOs and key NGO leaders. It is a worrisome comment on Scotland that national figures like Richard Dixon (WWF Scotland), Rosemary Burnett (Amnesty) and Kevin Dunion (Scottish Information Commissioner) are exluded, but members of the Celtic squad that have never, to my knowledge, played a single first-team game (e.g. Diarmuid O'Carroll) warrant articles of their own. I hoped to remedy that, starting with an interesting figure about whom I know enough to work up a useful article. I would be very grateful to Wikipedians if they could allow me to do so.

MichaelMcNab 10:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't delete this page - surely the head of Stop Climate Chaos Scotland warrants her own Wikipedia page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mopears (talk • contribs).

Users fifth edit. Jefffire 11:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Article now has multiple, independent, verifiable, non-trivial, sources. Catchpole 12:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete this vanity page, created/supported by single-purpose accounts. Subject is insufficiently notable and speculation over possible future achievements is neither here nor there. Pathlessdesert 12:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. All of the article seems to meet the policies just fine, it appears to be verifiable, from several reliable sources, and NPOV. As for the concept of notability (which is only a guideline anyway) being the co-ordinater of a national campaign, supported by several large NGOs is signifigant, as is convener of the Young Greens. Also, Cameron has had a number of articles published in the national press, and was prominent in her role of EUSA president, with numerous newspaper mentions. --Vclaw 15:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Look up Suzie Wylie, or Rami Okasha to see former/current student politicians with a lower profile than Cameron who have articles (a member of the NUS Executive Committee is less significant the the President of a major Union).—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mopears (talk • contribs).
• Keep If there's no debate over the legitimacy of the Stop Climate Chaos (Scotland) and Edinburgh University Student's Association, I think that there's no reason not to include indivuduals who hold or have held promenant positions in those organizationsD J L 20:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. I think it's quite clear that someone is drumming up support for this article off-line. This article has even less information than it did the first time it was deleted. Jefffire 08:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. There's not much doubt about that, it's really fairly blatant. This is simply an attempt at free publicity by the friends/ colleagues of the subject. The article is pretty much a stub anyway, such is the lack of notability of its subject, with barrel-scraping filler along the lines of "She was also awarded an internship at the Observer newspaper". At present this person is no more worthy of note than anybody else (and there are plenty) involved in student/minor politics. If the subject actually gets elected then she would probably be entitled to an article. Pathlessdesert 15:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - no clear evidence of notability as yet. BlueValour 03:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - editors might like to note that the Guardian (story "Green Ink") joins the list of newspapers covering Ruth Cameron's career MichaelMcNab 09:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

The "covering" is in fact a two paragraph tongue-in-cheek mention of degrogatory comments made alluding to her. Jefffire 10:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is, but as WP is NPOV, negative coverage is surely as valid an indicator of notability as positive coverage. Derogatory comments are made on news fora all the time; they do not warrant inclusion in the Guardian unless the target is themselves of interest. MichaelMcNab 10:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep for someone of her age Cameron has held at least two noted positions in Scottish life and the third place on the Lothains list for the Greens is notebale as, if they hold their two seats - as is likely - I know there is speculation as to whether Robin Harper MSP will serve a full term (he is nearing retirement age).—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sjharte (talk • contribs) .

• Do not delete unless it is duplicated. I have found this entry a good resource for bio information on Ruth Cameron.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.156.57.195 (talk • contribs) .
• keep please per catchpole there are multiple non trivial sources here Yuckfoo 03:49, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per all the other articles on aspiring and/or failed politicos. She can have an article if elected. --Mais oui! 12:51, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Meets WP:BLP standards which is more than can be said for most of the biographical crap that comes here. As Uncle G says, notability is not subjective: a page in the Sunday Herald is clearly non-trivial and the bit in the Graunaid is just about non-trivial. WP:BIO is only a guideline. The most important consideration is WP:V. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

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.