- 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 delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:34, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Lynne Serpe
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Lynne Serpe ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Although the article has over 40 citations, this is a case of refbombing. Virtually every citation is either: routine campaign coverage, a primary source, a non- WP:RS-compliant source (e.g. YouTube, LinkedIn, non-notable website), or trivial coverage of the subject. I did a WP:BEFORE search on multiple search engines and could not locate any significant coverage of the subject in sources that satisfy the notability guidelines. Sal2100 ( talk) 22:12, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and New York. Sal2100 ( talk) 22:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - per nom, and my searches (with both spellings of her name) online, and the WP library, including ProQuest. The source quality on ProQuest is better, but not in-depth, e.g "PARTY'S GOT GREEN Underdog enviros push for upset of Vallone" ( New York Daily News, 2009), event announcements, general election coverage, her work in New Zealand, e.g. "Princess Leia triumphs over Darth Vader in STV test run" ( The Dominion Post, 2002, quotes from her, e.g. "Lynne Serpe, the national campaign organiser for the Electoral Reform Coalition, said..."). 2015 commentary in The Week finds her 'worthy of notice', but overall there appears to be insufficient independent and reliable secondary support for notability at this time. Beccaynr ( talk) 02:33, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I couldn't find anything I would call SIGCOV on newspapers.com either. Jacona ( talk) 15:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for running as candidates in elections they didn't win — the bar at WP:NPOL is holding a notable political office, not just running for one — but this demonstrates neither that she had preexisting notability for other reasons independent of an unsuccessful candidacy nor a credible reason why her candidacy was somehow more important than everybody else's candidacies. Bearcat ( talk) 19:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete failed candidates for political office almost never meet WP:NPOL. Reads like campaign lit. Bkissin ( talk) 17:48, 6 June 2022 (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.
- 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 delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:34, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Lynne Serpe
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Lynne Serpe ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Although the article has over 40 citations, this is a case of refbombing. Virtually every citation is either: routine campaign coverage, a primary source, a non- WP:RS-compliant source (e.g. YouTube, LinkedIn, non-notable website), or trivial coverage of the subject. I did a WP:BEFORE search on multiple search engines and could not locate any significant coverage of the subject in sources that satisfy the notability guidelines. Sal2100 ( talk) 22:12, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, and New York. Sal2100 ( talk) 22:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - per nom, and my searches (with both spellings of her name) online, and the WP library, including ProQuest. The source quality on ProQuest is better, but not in-depth, e.g "PARTY'S GOT GREEN Underdog enviros push for upset of Vallone" ( New York Daily News, 2009), event announcements, general election coverage, her work in New Zealand, e.g. "Princess Leia triumphs over Darth Vader in STV test run" ( The Dominion Post, 2002, quotes from her, e.g. "Lynne Serpe, the national campaign organiser for the Electoral Reform Coalition, said..."). 2015 commentary in The Week finds her 'worthy of notice', but overall there appears to be insufficient independent and reliable secondary support for notability at this time. Beccaynr ( talk) 02:33, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I couldn't find anything I would call SIGCOV on newspapers.com either. Jacona ( talk) 15:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for running as candidates in elections they didn't win — the bar at WP:NPOL is holding a notable political office, not just running for one — but this demonstrates neither that she had preexisting notability for other reasons independent of an unsuccessful candidacy nor a credible reason why her candidacy was somehow more important than everybody else's candidacies. Bearcat ( talk) 19:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete failed candidates for political office almost never meet WP:NPOL. Reads like campaign lit. Bkissin ( talk) 17:48, 6 June 2022 (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.