Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joan Russow

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 Unanimous – WP:SNOW – KEEP. Wassupwestcoast (talk) 01:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Joan Russow

Joan Russow (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

I'm ambivalent on these professional activists. There seems to be a lot of these types of bios on Wikipedia. They do get news coverage 'cause they are activists. Joan Russow apparently has run for office several times but was never elected. She was leader of a party that has never had a candidate elected. Is she notable? Wassupwestcoast (talk) 21:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

• Keep, she was the party leader of a major Canadian federal party. GreenJoe 21:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

But what is a 'major' Canadian federal party? If the party has never held a seat in the House of Commons, is it major? Is it notable? Is Joan Russow notable? I never heard of her until I stumbled on her bio a year ago on Wikipedia. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 21:55, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

The Green Party of Canada continually get more votes than the Bloc Quebecois. GreenJoe 21:57, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

But the Bloc Quebecois has elected people to the House of Commons! Quite a few actually. The Green Party of Canada has elected no one. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 22:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you make an apples to apples comparison and compare Green votes to Bloq votes in the one province both parties run candidates in? Lies, damned lies and statistics, as they say. Resolute 22:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Obviously, I'm playing devil's advocate here. As I say above, I'm ambivalent. Still, where does the line get drawn for notability? It is easy to get your name in the news. It is easy to run for office and lose. It is even easy to become the leader of a defunct political party: for example, the Social Credit party in its last days. Easy, of course, being relative; but does that make someone notable enough for Wikipedia. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 22:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

"It is easy to get your name in the news." It seems that, in your view, the bar is set too low...? If you get your name in the news, repeatedly, non-trivially, then that is good enough for Wikipedia. Cheers, --Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. She is notable enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitplane01 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Here are the notability guidelines for politicians found at Wikipedia:Notability (people):

Politicians who have held international, national or sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislature.

Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage. Generally speaking, mayors are likely to meet this criterion, as are members of the main citywide government or council of a major metropolitan city.

Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such a person may be notable for other reasons besides their political careers alone.

I'm not convinced an un-elected activist is notable. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 22:15, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. While I'd hardly characterize the Greens as a "major" party, it certainly is a notable one. The leader of the party would also be notable. Resolute 22:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - availability of sources doesn't seem to be an issue, and I think the leader of any party running a nation-wide campaign (I now the Greens weren't running a full slate in Russow's day, but they were still running candidates across the country) is going to be notable. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 22:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy keep. Leaders of registered political parties are notable. CJCurrie (talk) 01:16, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, just purely on the basis of WP:N. Just now I added two more references to major news sources, and there are plenty more. --Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:20, 13 March 2008 (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.