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.
Delete: Media coverage regarding the subject's personal life falls under
WP:NOTINHERITED. Her own achievements at this point fail the
WP:POLITICIAN criteria.
AllyD (
talk) 10:49, 28 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Under
WP:NPOL, a person does not qualify for a Wikipedia article just for being an as-yet-unelected candidate in a future election — if you cannot credibly source that they were already notable enough for a Wikipedia article under a different inclusion criterion before they were named a candidate, then they do not become notable enough for a Wikipedia article until they win the election. And needless to say, no strong evidence of preexisting notability has been demonstrated here — virtually all of the coverage is about either her candidacy (failing
WP:ROUTINE) or her relationship with somebody else (failing
WP:NOTINHERITED).
Bearcat (
talk) 20:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Weak delete generally agree with above except there may be a few more sources
here, still not seeing Peacock as a subject notable in her own right.--
Tomwsulcer (
talk) 23:31, 29 September 2014 (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.
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.
Delete: Media coverage regarding the subject's personal life falls under
WP:NOTINHERITED. Her own achievements at this point fail the
WP:POLITICIAN criteria.
AllyD (
talk) 10:49, 28 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Under
WP:NPOL, a person does not qualify for a Wikipedia article just for being an as-yet-unelected candidate in a future election — if you cannot credibly source that they were already notable enough for a Wikipedia article under a different inclusion criterion before they were named a candidate, then they do not become notable enough for a Wikipedia article until they win the election. And needless to say, no strong evidence of preexisting notability has been demonstrated here — virtually all of the coverage is about either her candidacy (failing
WP:ROUTINE) or her relationship with somebody else (failing
WP:NOTINHERITED).
Bearcat (
talk) 20:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Weak delete generally agree with above except there may be a few more sources
here, still not seeing Peacock as a subject notable in her own right.--
Tomwsulcer (
talk) 23:31, 29 September 2014 (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.