Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marianne Meed Ward

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 16:31, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Marianne Meed Ward

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

City councillor in a city not large enough for its city councillors to pass WP:POLITICIAN just for being city councillors. In addition, article is sourced almost entirely to primary sources which do not demonstrate that she's attained sufficient notability to get past a different notability guideline instead; two of the footnotes, in fact, just link to other Wikipedia articles rather than to independent sources, while most of the others are to Twitter posts and/or the webpages of organizations she's involved with. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 00:13, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No evidence of notability as a politician. A search shows no mention of her outside of her own personal pages or a couple local articles. If there is more notability, the article should substantiate more. Scarlettail (talk) 06:07, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 00:13, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, probably a step above your average local politician notability wise, but I don't think she's quite there yet. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:21, 11 March 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Delete I don't actually think any city has city counselors who get default notability, but definitely not this city.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record, per WP:POLOUTCOMES we currently do have a consensus to accept articles on councillors in major metropolitan "world cities" on the order of Toronto, Montreal, New York City, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles or London, though for anything below that "elite" level of cities a city councillor has to be notable for a lot more than merely being a city councillor. So it's not strictly true that no cities get default notability for their municipal councillors — but it is intentionally set as a very high bar that most cities don't clear. Bearcat (talk) 12:52, 13 March 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.