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. - Mailer Diablo 06:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article doesn't say it, but it's the Texas 22nd District -- she's one of the Republicans vying to replace Tom DeLay now that he couldn't get himself thrown off the ballot. It's not at all clear whether she will run or not from what I understand; she's indicated she'd drop out if the party asked her to. In any event she's the equivalent of someone running for a nomination, not the office itself, and we don't do articles about people who aren't candidates in general elections, much less write-ins. Daniel Case 02:18, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above. Not yet notable. will381796 02:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Irongargoyle 02:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete — per nom. Dionyseus 02:35, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There are not only articles related to nominees, there are articles related to nominees who are not, and have never been, officeholders. See Tony Trupiano. To eliminate an article about someone who is not only the preferred choice of the Republican Party in that district-at the present moment-but also a well-known elected official from Houston seems to be presumptuous, at best. Ruthfulbarbarity 08:17, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Google News gives 318 stories under her name - sounds like she has plenty of news coverage, passes WP:BIO, whatever. It'd be nice if someone added some sources. WilyD 13:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I created the article; however, I did not have time to go back and fill in the specifics. I planned on doing it this weekend, but I was called away to family responsibilites. Gibbs is the endorsed canadidate for Tom Delay's former congressional seat. She was endorsed by the Fort Bend County Republican party precinct chairpersons over the weekend. As others have pointed out, this will be one of the most highly watched congressional races in the country in the next two months. Why is she a write-in if she is really the Republican choice? Because Delay won the primary election and then fought a court battle with the Democrats to have his name replaced and another official Republican name added. He fought through the court system and lost. So Delay pulled his name off of the ballot, but it was too late in the election cycle to replace him with an official Republican nominee. So the Fort Bend Republicans, not the only county in the district, met behind closed doors and endorsed Gibbs. Gibbs would qualify for her own Wikipedia article simply on her accomplishments so far (prominent doctor, Houston City Council member, etc.). However, the fact that she is the endorsed Republican candidate for Tom Delay's old seat is enough for qualification by itself also. --Getaway 14:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WilyD --Arnzy ^{(whats up?)} 14:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep This will be one of the most watched political dramas of the election season and Gibbs will be a big player in it. Anyone who is interested in who maintains control of Congress after the election is paying attention to this race. Even the legal circumstances that kept her off the ballot between Democratic and Republican interest is notable. (Though I would say more needs to be written about that in the article in an NPOV tone).Agne 20:18, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Being a prominent doctor and a city council member is usually not enough for notability unless she meets WP:PROF or WP:BIO. The city council members for a city, even as large a city as Houston, are not generally notable. Although, this information should probably be included somewhere. Is there an article on the 2006 Texas Congressional Race? Maybe a bit about her in that article, if it exists, would be sufficient, until she actually wins the election. will381796 21:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment With all due respect, you are mistaken. There are articles on each of the members of the Los Angeles City Council, and over half of the members of the New York City Council. In fact, there should probably be more articles related to the latter legislative body, since Larry Seabrook-a former state senator and well-known congressional candidate who now sits on the City Council-does not have an article devoted to his career. Furthermore, the fact that she is the de facto Republican nominee in what is one of the most volatile congressional races in the country would merit an article in and of itself, regardless of any other notoriety she might have achieved as a prominent member of the city council of the fourth-largest city in the nation. That being said, her record as a city councilwoman would also be sufficient to earn a Wikipedia article, per above.Ruthfulbarbarity 22:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a follow-up the above comment. There are fifty city council members (aldermen) on the Chicago City Council and every single one of them have a Wikipedia article about them. Chicago is the third largest city and Houston is the fourth largest city. Also, there is no way all fifty of them should have their own Wikipedia article. Please read some of them. For example, I'm sure this person is a good person, but what qualifies this Chicago alderman with a Wikipedia article, other than simply being on the Chicago City Council? See John Pope (alderman). Based upon this article, I respectfully disagree that simply being on a city council gets you in Wikipedia. Sekula-Gibbs would be the first Houston city council member with her own Wikipedia article and there are a couple of others who probably should be covered also, but ALL of the Chicago aldermen?? I don't think so.--Getaway 19:57, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• keep -- per Agne -- Geo Swan 22:15, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Re: The write-in issue. While a candidate winning office as a write-in candidate is a rarity, it is not unheard of. See Linda Smith and Strom Thurmond. The number of individuals who have waged notable, competitive write-in candidacies-but who ultimately lost their races-is even larger. Ruthfulbarbarity 22:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Right - ultimately, the people argue for delete are arguing that she shouldn't be notable, not that she isn't notable, which she obviously is, per 318 google news hits. That kind of argument doesn't conform to WP:NPOV WilyD 00:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As well as repeated articles referencing her participation in this race published in the Houston Chronicle, Dallas Morning-News, Washington Post, New York Times, and other major regional and national daily newspapers. Ruthfulbarbarity 02:29, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep for now, since the race is still in progress. We can always delete it later if she loses, and until then, it'll be useful. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 02:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - While I might agree in most cases about not including write-ins, very few have the endorsement of the incumbent party, and even fewer have to do with the Tom DeLay saga. Souperman 04:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep She is endorsed by the Republican Party for the election.[1] C56C 06:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep She could possibly win a seat in congress, one that has been safe in the clutches of Tom Delay until just this year. The race is important; so are those running in it. Elicenter 10:17, 22 August 2006 (EDT)
• Delete - she's a write-in candidate. Rhelmerichs 04:28, 23 August 2006 (EDT)
• Comment That is not the measure of notability. As has already been pointed out-several times-there have been a handful of write-in candidates who have gone on to win the general election, and even more who have waged extremely competitive, high-profile campaigns. She has the endorsement of large segments of the GOP within her constituency, and is the de facto Republican-endorsed candidate at this moment. Her campaign has earned media coverage in every national daily newspaper, and every major daily within the state of Texas. Also, she is a well-known officeholder within the city of Houston, the fourth-largest city in the nation. She has a prima facie case for inclusion in Wikipedia, and the fact that this article was even nominated for deletion-at a time when the prominence of Sekula-Gibbs is only increasing-strikes me as odd. Ruthfulbarbarity 06:07, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep this race is very notable and will get much national media coverage. --Tdl1060 19:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Sekula-Gibbs is a legitimate contender. The district is one of the most Republican in the country and any Democrat will start out as an underdog. The Republican Party endorsed candidate should be covered through the campaign at the bare minimum.--BballJones 20:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - If large city councilmembers are kept, I would keep hers too - especially since she is vying to fill Delay's seat. WhisperToMe 22:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I think she's notable enough. Quite a few google hits. I think it's a valid article. --DanielCD 22:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep. If you need evidence of at least national notability, see [2], [3], and [4]. -- Seth Ilys 00:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep--However this article is biased in the extreme. This an encyclopedia, not a campaign board. Please just report the facts.Rockhopper10r 02:05, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Especially at the end, the article contains rampant uncited "facts" and extraordinary speculation. Examples: that the district is "heavily" Republican (could we see a link to an independent site with polling numbers?) and also that the "leans democratic" rating could change (okay, says which political expert?). Other examples exist. The article currently comes across as much more of an editorial rather than encyclopedic content. Support deletion or significant and substantial revision. Revision as of 05:09, 25 August 2006 Ihatenewsreporters (Talk | contribs) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ihatenewsreporters (talk • contribs)

• Keep. The article may need work, but that's no reason to delete it. --Myles Long 16:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep: she is the candidate of one of the two major political parties in a highly-watched congressional race. AJD 16:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Even if the norm on WP is not to keep articles on write-in candidates, the situation with this candidate is both highly unusual and certainly notable, as indicated by the media coverage. Fairsing 05:23, 26 August 2006 (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.