Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nancy Spannaus

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 of the debate was delete. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 13:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nancy Spannaus

nn failed political candidate - delete KleenupKrew 11:35, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete pernom + recent AfD. The JPS^{talk to me} 12:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, fails WP:BIO, and doesn't the "I support Lyndon LaRouche's demand that (insert Larouche nonsense)" justify a fast exit with a bullet in the back of the head? Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Lyndon_LaRouche. - Motor (talk) 13:44, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable. Ifnord 14:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable. -- Kjkolb 02:09, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per reasons listed above. GentlemanGhost 16:01, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment I read BigDT's info below, but it didn't change my mind. GentlemanGhost 10:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete no assertion of notability. Eluchil404 22:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep She is a higher up in the LaRouche Movement and has plenty of publications and references (media and otherwise) unrelated to her failed political candidacies ... [1] [2] [3] ... she is currently the editor in chief of Larouche's New Federalist newspaper. Further, due to the shenanigans in the 2002 election, she would be notable from that alone. Basically, there was a big fight between her and the Democrat party. She tried to become a Democrat and steal the Democrat nomination (ala Pat Buchanan / Reform Party). I didn't see this AFD when it first came out. As such, there are a bunch of deletes in the now-several days old AFD. If there are no responses after this one, I would encourage the closing admin to relist it for further consensus. (If other people reading this still feel she is non-notable, ok, that's fine, I'm not going to get too upset over it - just if nobody but the closing admin reads this, it's probably worth further consideration since the seven people voting to delete are probably aware that she has any notability beyond a failed candidacy.) BigDT 03:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Neutral. As an admin who watches articles related to the LaRouche Movement, I don't care one way or another. Spannaus is a figure in that movement, but her overall notability (such as it is) rests in her U.S. Senate campaigns. As with other LaRouche candidates (see Janice Hart), Spannaus' minor degree of success seems to have been based on ignorance of her positions rather then knowledge of them. How many articles do we have about people who's chief claim to fame is getting 20% of the vote in a statewide election? However if there is a considerable lack of reliable sources to base an article upon, then it may be impossible to write a verifiable, NPOV article about her. In that sense it may not meet the notability standard of having reliable, 3rd party sources. It's up to you, closing administrator! Cheers, -Will Beback 10:18, 7 June 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.