Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Violet Edwards (politician)

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:50, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Violet Edwards (politician)

[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)

County-level politician, fails

WP:GNG notability. (And that's before even broaching the subject of likely COI editing.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. County commission is not a level of office that guarantees automatic inclusion rights under
blogs and her own campaign website and her own social networking profiles and her staff profiles on the self-published websites of her own employers and raw tables of election results. And no, "first [insert underrepresented minority group here] to do this not inherently notable thing in her own county" is not an instant notability freebie, either — if being elected to a county council had made her the first black woman officeholder in the entire history of the entire United States, then she would probably have a case for inclusion as a historic first, but if her firstness is limited to her own county, then that doesn't fulfill the "significantly more notable than most other county councillors" test in and of itself. Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to be referenced much, much, much better than this.
Also worth noting that the creator previously tried to make this happen through the AFC process at Draft:Violet Edwards, and then after the second rejection at AFC they just bypassed that process and directly created this in articlespace instead of attempting to improve and resubmit the AFC draft any further — which, needless to say, is not how the AFC process works. Bearcat (talk) 07:50, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:08, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Bearcat's well reasoned argument on why county commissioners are not default notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:01, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This article is built on Linkedin (which is both unreliable and does not help notability) and routine local election reports. WP:BEFORE turns up more local news reports. Fails WP:NPOL. This is maybe the best source we have, but it's basically an alumni interview. The attempt to circumvent the AfC process is displeasing and should not be encouraged. -Indy beetle (talk) 21:26, 12 March 2021 (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.