Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Summer Lee

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. Before renominating, consider redirecting/merging to Pennsylvania House of Representatives election, 2018. So Why 15:37, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Summer Lee

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Summer Lee is a previously non-notable individual currently running for the state legislature. She has received ROUTINE coverage. Democratic Socialists of America candidates, 2018 election is a potential target for a REDIRECT. E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:01, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 September 2. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:20, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:56, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:56, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:56, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:56, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Since the article states she faces no opposition in the November election and will become a state senator, won't she meet notability criteria then (WP:NPOL)? It might be better to keep it now rather than to just have it legitimately recreated in 2 months. Peacock (talk) 13:05, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to set a precedent along the lines, of: it's OK to start an article about a candidate as long as you are sure that they will win.... Article's creator and sole editor User:Sfeldman can agree or request that this be moved to user space (and/or other unelected candidates articles they have started article about.) They can, of course, be moved back to main space when/if candidates win.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:47, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:51, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify the coverage is not so detailed that I want to ignore the standard practice for state legislature candidates. There's also no reason to delete this, per PCock. Moving to draft until November seems the best option, though a keep (partially invoking IAR) would also be reasonable. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:58, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:IAR. With no opposition, she will become clearly notable in a short period of time. I don't think that a very short-term deletion on a technicality is consistent with Wikipedia's mission. Teemu08 (talk) 03:08, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unelected candidates for office are not notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:43, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify. As near as I can tell, Pennsylvania does not simply acclaim uncontested candidates to office the moment the primaries are over — the state follows a process whereby she still has to actually get actual votes from actual voters on general election day before she's actually declared as the rep-elect. As much of a meaningless formality as this may seem, it's not — with two months still to go before election day and another month after that before the newly elected legislators actually have their status bumped up from rep-elect to incumbent officeholder, it remains entirely possible in the meantime that an "uncontested" candidate could withdraw their candidacy for personal or professional or scandal reasons, or die in a car accident, and thus not actually become the actual rep. (And for that matter, while I don't know if Pennsylvania is one of them or not, there are some jurisdictions where even an unopposed candidate still has to beat an explicit "none of the above" option on election day to actually win the election.) So her running unopposed is not, in and of itself, a reason to waive WP:NPOL — even if the election itself looks like a formality, there still do remain ways in which she could fail to actually become the incumbent representative. She still has to go into general election day as a person who actually gets voted for by the voters of her district, and power-enwiki is correct that the coverage shown so far is not so compelling as to exempt her from being treated the same way as everybody else who has to get voted for by the voters of their districts first — and furthermore, there appear to be at least six other districts across the state where a non-incumbent Democratic or Republican candidate is also running unopposed, without any of those other candidates besides Lee and Innamorato having been deemed automatically article-worthy by any Wikipedia editor yet. So it's "inevitable" enough that we should permit this to be held in draftspace, while making sure to clarify that draftspacing it is not otherwise setting a precedent to allow routine draftification of just any article about just any candidate — but it's not "inevitable" enough to grant her a mainspace exemption from NPOL yet, because as of today there are still ways in which she could not actually become a state legislator in December. Bearcat (talk) 17:23, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify It is still possible that a write-in candidate can win the election. As it stands this can be recreated when the election has passed, assuming she wins. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 20:38, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Full-length profiles written independently by journalists in the New Yorker, New Pittsburgh Courier, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and Root satisfy WP:GNG, WP:BASIC, and WP:NPOL (criterion 2). WP:COMMONOUTCOMES#Candidates cannot overrule these guidelines; see WP:CONLIMITED.

If editors want to create a new standard holding that politicians are only allowed to have articles after taking office, they need to gather consensus to rewrite these notability guidelines in a centralized discussion. FourViolas (talk) 22:56, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per GNG and if not that easily passes NPOL, per FourViolas. Depth and breadth of national and local press mentions. JesseRafe (talk) 15:47, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.