Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tina Podlodowski

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:32, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tina Podlodowski

[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)

Does not pass WP:NPOL as she hasn't held state-wide public office, at the very least. Bedivere (talk) 21:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, meets WP:GNG. Chairs of state parties often are notable. Andre🚐 22:34, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This person, notable primarily as the chair of a state-level political party is not an automatic WP:NPOL pass, and the article isn't referenced well enough to get them over WP:GNG. This is not what it takes to make a political operative notable enough for an encyclopedia article. --Bedivere (talk) 22:24, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If someone meets GNG they may be notable. Nobody is asserting an "automatic" pass nor is passing NPOL necessary. Andre🚐 22:34, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and Washington. Shellwood (talk) 22:29, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I've added some sources and can add more. She's clearly notable by our standards, though the article was not in great shape when it was nominated. I'm unclear on whether or not the nominator engaged in any WP:BEFORE. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:59, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Members of prominent city councils, such as Seattle, are usually kept. Still, the question is are there enough sources to write about her accomplishments in office. This piece in the Stranger in 1999 after she announced she was not running for reelection does talk about her accomplishments and positioning on the council (but is not yet reflected in the article). There are also national articles that describe some of the policies she pushed as as state party chair. In addition, the subject has been mentioned multiple times in the NY Times, in a story about Microsoft employees, and the subject's efforts to place books about gay families in the school libraries. --Enos733 (talk) 20:27, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As usual, state party chairs are not inherently notable ex officio but may be notable if they have received significant coverage. I also do not think that Seattle is a large enough city for city councilmembers to be considered notable ex officio. All that said, with the sources covered above and that were added to the article after nomination, there does appear to be sufficient significant coverage to demonstrate notability in this case. Curbon7 (talk) 19:15, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:27, 23 February 2023 (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.