Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genevieve Jones-Wright
The problem with ascribing her preexisting notability for her prior work in the public defender's office and/or on pot reform is that the sourcing for that simply isn't cutting it. The sources here that are strongly ''about'' Jones-Wright, for the purposes of establishing whether she passes  or not, are tied directly to the candidacy itself — all of the sources that clearly exist ''outside'' the campaign coverage just namecheck her existence in coverage ''about'' something or somebody ''else''. The ''Nation'' cite, for example, just mentions her name one single time apart from the caption to a photograph, and is in no substantive way about her — while she doesn't have to be the ''sole'' subject of a source for it to count for something, she ''does'' still have to be ''more'' than just ''mentioned''. And no, a candidate doesn't clear the notability standards for her prior work just because her prior work gets mentioned as background in the candidacy coverage either. There's also a significant |reference bombing problem here, because we rarely if ever need a single statement to be referenced to ''four'' or ''five'' different citations for the same piece of information — and far, far too many of the references here are to podcasts and community hyperlocals, not strongly reliable media outlets.So no, her preexisting notability as a public defender has not been properly established by the sources at hand — with these sources, I'm still left evaluating her notability solely on the question of whether or not candidates in primaries get Wikipedia articles on that basis in and of itself. Which they don't
— User:Bearcat, 17:45, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:REFBOMB (Wikipedia:Notability)