Celeste Maloy : The closest thing to in-depth coverage is an article recapping a presentation she gave at a planning committee and two articles solely about Chris Stewart endorsing her.  If she wins the election then obviously she'll be notable, but until then this page seems to fail WP:GNG and WP:1E BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk ) 16:03, 26 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , Women ,  and Utah .  Shellwood ( talk ) 17:08, 26 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Possible WP:ATD would be a redirect to 2023 Utah's 2nd congressional district special election .  Curbon7 ( talk ) 19:26, 26 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] True, a redirect could work (or even a move to draftspace to hold the page until the election is over).  BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk ) 19:53, 26 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : I am the article's creator.  First, I want to thank you for providing this feedback.  I am sincerely trying to learn and get better every day.  I am a very casual editor, as you can probably see.  But I want you to know that I did consider the lack of coverage as mentioned in BottleofChoclateMilk's reasoning, however, I simply had a different opinion.  I did not find them to just be "mentions in passing."  I thought a few of them were quite detailed and even included quotes that directly related to the subject's position at the time.  And I did remove the directory listings, which were not included to prove notability but rather to provide citations in claims made in the article.  I am not trying to start a war here.  But I think two people could look at the same articles and come to opposite conclusions.   I think the article as it stood at the time of creation was already enough to pass the WP:GNG threshold.  However, now especially, I think there has been more than enough in-depth coverage to push her over.  By a long shot.  Here are just some examples of recent coverage.  "Robert Gehrke: How Celeste Maloy went from long shot to a front-runner for Congress" .  The Salt Lake Tribune .  "Celeste Maloy registered as a Utah Republican voter three days after filing to run for Congress. Here's why it matters" .  The Salt Lake Tribune .  "GOP sticking with Celeste Maloy as convention winner after delegates question eligibility" .  www.ksl.com .  "Celeste Maloy wins Utah Republicans' nomination for special congressional election" .  The Salt Lake Tribune .  This will be a very major election and have huge implications for the national stage.  Although personally, I find it inappropriate to speculate that the article's subject is going to win the election, a lot of media outlets certainly have been making such speculations.  This is reflected in coverage.  Certainly, now that she is the official nominee of her political party, that alone is enough to push her over the threshold.  DrSangChi ( talk ) 00:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Per WP:1E , being involved in one event is not necessarily enough to establish notability.  There seems to be absolutely no in-depth coverage of Maloy outside of this election.  Being a party's nominee for Congress does not establish notability.  If she wins the election then of course she will get a page, but until then you have not proven notability.  The argument of "media outlets speculate she'll win" is irrelevant and and fails WP:CRYSTAL .  BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk ) 01:00, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify Creator has done a good start job, but the notability is on hold until the election is over, at which point this can be evaluated against wp:npolitician.   Time will tell.  Lamona ( talk ) 04:00, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to the election that she's running in, if it exists.  She is not currently notable and we cannot assume she will win the election.  Being the official nominee is not enough for enduring notability.  SportingFlyer T · C 09:41, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to 2023 Utah's 2nd congressional district special election .  Per the article Celeste Maloy is an attorney and a land rights advocate.  She is also a candidate for Congress.  Congressional candidates are neither notable or not notable under WP:POLITICIAN .  However, nothing is so distinct about her candidacy (especially at this point) that she herself warrants an article.  The materials provided in AfD that are posted to support GNG are run of the mill coverage of a candidacy expected to arise in any election.  The candidacy does not rise to the historic levels of candidates like Christine O'Donnell , Pro-Life (born Marvin Thomas Richardson) , or Lar "America First" Daly .  The article makes no mention of land rights advocacy so I cannot determine if Celeste Maloy would meet GNG for any activism.  An attorney can qualify for a Wikipedia article.  While not an official policy, I find Bearian's standards for attorneys to be a good guide to determining if enough sources can be found to meet GNG.  Maloy does not meet any of these at this time so establishing GNG is unlikely. -- Mpen320 ( talk ) 18:29, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Without assuming bad faith, I am going to leave this essay here.  Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing .  Mpen320 ( talk ) 18:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] True, we shouldn't say anything without proof, though it is worth noting that the professional headshot of Maloy on her article was uploaded 11 minutes after the article was created by user "CelesteMaloy2023" and tagged as "own work."  Either way, I think there's a strong case (and consensus) to redirect.  BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk ) 22:12, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect , obviously without prejudice against recreation in November if she wins.  People do not get Wikipedia articles just for standing as candidates in future elections — the notability bar at WP:NPOL is holding a notable political office, not just running for one, while candidates get articles only if either  (a) they already had preexisting notability for other reasons that would already have earned them an article anyway, or  (b) they can show credible reasons why their candidacy should be seen as a special case of significantly greater notability than everybody else's candidacies, such that even if they lose people will still be looking for information about their campaign ten years from now anyway .  Neither of those things in evidence here, however — and since all candidates in all elections always get some degree of campaign coverage during the election, the existence of such coverage does not automatically translate into "campaign coverage = GNG, ergo NPOL not applicable", because if that were how it worked then every candidate in every election would always get that exemption and NPOL itself would become meaningless.  So if she wins in November, then the campaign coverage will certainly become usable to help expand the article that she'll be entitled to at that time — but the existence of campaign coverage is not sufficient grounds for an article about an unelected candidate before the election is over.  Bearcat ( talk ) 16:03, 1 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to 2023 Utah's 2nd congressional district special election as a usual and appropriate outcome for candidates running for the US House (see WP:POLOUTCOMES .  Verifiable biographical and campaign information can be summarized on the page about the special election.  -- Enos733 ( talk ) 17:42, 1 July 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: redirect