Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Dancey

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 Draftify‎. We don't have a "keep until" disposition for an article. The closest we have to that is a draft, and its six month life meets the requested timeline, allowing for a clear consensus. Owen× ☎ 12:38, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Dancey

[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)

Appears to be campaign advertising for a non-notable individual. Fails

WP:NPOL. Nothing in his life or career up to now indicates notability. AusLondonder (talk) 05:28, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and England. AusLondonder (talk) 05:28, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 06:22, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - in less than a month he will either be an MP or an also-ran, and the political notability will be entirely clear, so the timing of this AfD is puzzling. I've no view as yet on possible Olympic notability. Ingratis (talk) 07:50, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not puzzling at all. It's normal practice on Wikipedia to not create articles for candidates for political office with no other claim to notability. AusLondonder (talk) 16:38, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep until after the election on 4 July, when it will be clear whether this person meets NPOL or not. There's no point at all in deleting the article and then immediately re-creating it. Common sense, surely... Ingratis (talk) 14:26, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article in national press (Daily Express): https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1877309/Labour-candidate-immigration-Stockton Bram880 (talk) 19:42, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Has notability due to his Olympic involvement. Also agree timing of this AfD is poor, as it is highly likely that he will also be an MP in 23 days which will establish the notability on the political aspect. ClevelandUpdates (talk) 11:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being an "executive assistant to Lord Seb Coe, the chairman of the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games" is not a free pass on notability. The one source regarding his involvement in the Olympics, a local newspaper, states "He was among the first 200 people who started organising the Games" - are all those people notable? We need significant, in-depth coverage of the role he played personally. Not seeing that at all. AusLondonder (talk) 16:41, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify and quickly. This is currently
WP:TOOSOON. His Olympics work does not make him notable, the article referenced states "He was among the first 200 people who started organising the Games in 2008" and is just about a visit to a local school. I think it's ethically very dubious to state a candidate is notable enough for a Wikipedia entry while they are actively campaigning based on a non-notable career to date. Orange sticker (talk) 17:34, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Draftify. People are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just for running as candidates for offices they have not already held — and no, the fact that the campaign is currently underway does not create a special moratorium on deleting them, because that would completely defeat the entire purpose of that rule. Wikipedia is not a repository of campaign brochures for as yet unelected aspiring politicians, but the election campaign is precisely the time when such people most want the publicity they think a Wikipedia article would provide them, so such a moratorium would simply set us up to have to accept a flood of campaign biographies for every single candidate in the entire country every time there's an election anywhere on earth.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation in July if he wins the seat, but simply being a candidate is not grounds for an article in and of itself — and restoring a previously-deleted article if necessary is not difficult enough that any special dispensations would need to be given for candidates in current election campaigns. Bearcat (talk) 15:51, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: As it currently stands, this subject lacks the requisite
WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 22:44, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Article in national press (Daily Express): https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1877309/Labour-candidate-immigration-Stockton Bram880 (talk) 21:56, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Campaign coverage, which is simply expected to always exist for all candidates and thus does not make this candidate more special than other candidates, contributes absolutely nothing toward passage of

WP:GNG in advance of winning the election. Bearcat (talk) 04:43, 18 June 2024 (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.