Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/StephanieDeardenMCP

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE -- Francs2000 | Talk 02:14, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] StephanieDeardenMCP

vanity page, non-wikified, incorrect title, personal resume Vamp:Willow 20:41, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Wiki is not a crystal ball--Porturology 21:22, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
• Weakest possible keep. Liberal Democrat candidates for British parliament are encyclopedic, even if they have slightly naughty-sounding consistituency names (Tooting, since you asked). But this is terribly formatted and barely coherent. Tag for cleanup--I'll work on it myself if it gets kept. Meelar (talk) 21:57, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
  • Not really, seeing as she lost along with several thousand others. Anyone can lose at an election without becoming notable. -Splash 22:24, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
    • True, but what pushed me over the line to keep was that she was from a semi-major party. Only a few people can manage that. Meelar (talk) 13:24, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
      • In fairness, some 640 people managed it, one for each Constituency. In the Lib Dems' case, about 580 of them then lost. This is unverifiable owing to my anonymity, but I have stood for election for the same party (to a local council) and lost; they just rang me up and said "we're short of a candidate in this seat which we're gonna lose anyway, but want people to be able to vote for us. Fancy doing nothing at all, apart from signing on the dotted line?". So I did. And I lost, and remain non-notable. Parliament's not the same as a local council, but the selection process isn't quite as rigorous as it might be, epsecially in the unwinnable seats. -Splash 17:22, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, nn, wasn't elected and has no other claim to notability. This is just a resume. -Splash 22:24, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Losing candidates for political office are not notable unless known for other things. On the basis of this, Ms Dearden isn't. Capitalistroadster 23:58, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
• Weak Keep and Cleanup. A candidate from a major party for a national legislature, even if otherwise nn probably deserves at least a stub (though not a resume). --Pyroclastic 01:47, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
• Bahleet Delete. Thorns Among Our Leaves 16:51, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable per Splash. Even were the article to be kept, currently it is a resume which is unacceptable. Quale 16:21, 22 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.