Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terry Neese

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. If an individual clears WP:GNG, whether or not they meet WP:NPOL isn't relevant; with respect to GNG, SusunW's sources have not been convincingly refuted. There are language problems, but these are not egregious enough to require immediate deletion, and most of the promotional material could simply be dumped. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:59, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Terry Neese

[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)

Political candidate for office who does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NPOL. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:06, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:06, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oklahoma-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:06, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. People do not get Wikipedia articles for being candidates in elections they did not win, but this article is not properly demonstrating that she has preexisting notability for other reasons. It certainly thinks it is, because it's written like a résumé, but it's not reliably sourced for the purposes of demonstrating the notability of her career: it is referenced entirely to primary sources except for a single news article about her winning a minor local award that isn't a magic notability clincher all by itself. Bearcat (talk) 22:37, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Though it is poorly written, that in itself is no reason for deletion. Sufficient coverage in reliable sources to confirm notability. There are 62,985 matches in newspapers.com alone, though admittedly many are brief mentions. Some of the weightier clips, include: President of the National Association of Women Business Owners 1990 -1997, White House lobbying for NAWBO, Appointment to SBA Council, Powerbroker for small business, Nomination to direct US Mint, Rejected Mint post, Involvement in the Women’s Business Ownership Act of 1988, Women's Empowerment program, Meets with VP Bush,National Public Policy Advocate of the Year, Elected to Consumer Alert Board, Induction National Women's Hall of Fame, business philosophy. And while her run for office and loss was not notable, the fact that she was the first woman nominated by a major party to run is. Shades of Ferraro and Clinton. SusunW (talk) 05:50, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SusunW, I erred in not checking newspapers.com. I didn't know about newspaperarchive.com. I've seen enough to move to withdraw the nomination, but I can't as there is another delete vote. If Bearcat strikes their vote, I'll withdraw. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:34, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings, SusunW. Could you please clarify your reference to "Ferraro and Clinton"? As to the many yet cumulatively insignificant mentions in the Daily Oklahoman, I have already addresses them in my own sugegstion below. -The Gnome (talk) 19:14, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Agree that it is very poorly written and needs lots of cleanup, but she has been inducted into both national and state-wide halls of fame, and has received many other awards, and as SusanW pointed out there is PLENTY of coverage to meet GNG. Tag it for cleanup, but do not delete. --Krelnik (talk) 15:37, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Fails WP:NPOL but the sourcing independent of her campaign for Lt. Governor clearly demonstrates WP:GNG. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:36, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I did a bit of cleanup and hope the article reads a little better. Also added some sources. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:49, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per SusunW Fails WP:NPOL but passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:27, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete overly promotional article. ALso if someone does not pass NPOL they need to pass notability for non-political reasons which she does not. In theory every politician could pass GNG, but we demand more for coverage on politicans because otherwise we would be turned into a platform for campaigns to disseminate information on candidates.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:59, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: She isn't a politician, she is a business woman and public policy advisor. She happened to run in one race in a long career and lost. It is only significant because she was nominated. SusunW (talk) 22:21, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SusunW, she has been a political candidate, which makes NPOL relevant. (GNG supersedes it, yes.) – Muboshgu (talk) 23:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Muboshgu, we'll have to disagree on that point. Lots and lots of people run as candidates never to run again. Lots of people do notable things which have nothing to do with politics. If their notability stems from something else entirely, holding them to a standard for one facet of their career is not logical. SusunW (talk) 23:14, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SusunW, no, I think we agree, we're just talking past each other a little bit. If she meets GNG, it doesn't matter that she doesn't meet NPOL. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:27, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Comment I want to delete this article - it's written promotionally/like a resume - but while she fails WP:NPOL, she does appear to pass WP:GNG on other grounds, though a lot of the newspapers.com coverage above are WP:MILLish they do show she has been recognised in some pretty important positions. The article desperately needs some WP:TNT as it is promotional, though, so I entirely understand the delete !votes. SportingFlyer T·C 07:28, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Switching from a keep !vote to a comment, which while a pretty weak thing to do represents my neutrality - while I think this will be kept, I'm persuaded by The Gnome's analysis, and I still think this needs WP:TNT - but not going to switch to a delete !vote since I still think there's a chance of a good, reliably sourced article coming out of this. SportingFlyer T·C 20:43, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete since subject fails WP:GNG. The "many newspapers" invoked by Keep supporters are generic reports by the Daily Oklahoman, e.g. the list of 1982 the inductees in the Oklahoma Women's Hall of Fame; a small item about a non profit outfit appointing a news co-chairs, one of whom is our subject; a clipping about women from Oklahoma attending an int'l conference, with the focus on someone else, named Debra Murray, and not the subject; a news item about president George W. Bush supposedly wanting to name her Director of the Mint, small item, which never happened; and a list of "business people," among whom is our subject. And that's it! There is truly nothing to support notability. -The Gnome (talk) 06:16, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Has enough coverage to pass WP:GNG. Nikoo.Amini (talk) 15:37, 14 August 2019 (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.