Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kay Mousley

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 keep after addition of reference. Opabinia regalis 06:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kay Mousley

Kay Mousley (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

I don't think being an electoral commissioner is notable. The others at the page's link don't have pages on Wikipedia. Akihabara 02:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete, doesn't seem notable enough. NawlinWiki 02:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Canley 04:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - only trivial mentions on Google, 1 news ghit, also a trivial mention. MER-C 04:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete no news mention outside the job and her job is simply not significant enough to sustain an article. Does not pass any part of WP:BIO - Peripitus (Talk) 05:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete don't think electoral commissioner per se is a notible position. SkierRMH,08:51, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. It is hard to have an article on the elections in South Australia without having an article on the person who runs those elections, which is what an electoral commissioner does. The article has references. -- TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 23:12, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Utterly trivial claim to notability. Rebecca 00:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. She is South Australia's first female Electoral Commissiooner and there are 30 Google News Archives results. [1] The article is referenced which puts her across the line for me. The person above should sign their comment. Oops as should I. Capitalistroadster 01:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
    • That is perhaps of note. If you'd like the article to be kept, can you please update it to mention this and provide the references so it unambiguously passes WP:BIO for notability. Thanks. Akihabara 02:15, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Reference added as requested. I can't figure out how to use the referencing system so I have added it manually. Capitalistroadster 08:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm going to have to say Keep, based on the points of the person above me. Could use a little bit of cleanup though. Lankiveil 01:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC).
  • Definitely keep - per Australian Electoral Commission being an important post, and first female at that. More notable than 90% of bios on Wikipedia. -Patstuarttalk|edits 08:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep while probably not all electoral commisioners are notable this one is per the news coverage of ehr appointment. Eluchil404 10:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep multiple mentions in media equals notable. Most electoral commissioners are probably not notable, but this one is. Ccscott 17:14, 15 December 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.