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 redirect to 2021 New York City mayoral election#Libertarian Party. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 22:45, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stacey Prussman[edit]

Stacey Prussman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. Fails WP:NPOL and WP:ENT, and references do not satisfy WP:BASIC. References are all either primary sources or contain only minor mentions of Prussman. ― Tartan357 Talk 03:34, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. ― Tartan357 Talk 03:34, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. ― Tartan357 Talk 03:34, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. ― Tartan357 Talk 03:34, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. ― Tartan357 Talk 03:34, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 04:35, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
AMK152, running in an election does not confer any notability at all. See WP:NPOL. And minor appearances in entertainment roles do not either, see WP:ENT. ― Tartan357 Talk 14:58, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hopestarrocker12, if she has entire articles in major sources written about her, then let's see them. Because there aren't any currently cited in her article. ― Tartan357 Talk 15:39, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
She has an entire article written about her in The Jewish Forward as cited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopestarrocker12 (talkcontribs) 15:47, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I just checked her article again, and that's not true, there is no such article cited. Please sign your posts and try not to mess with my signature again. ― Tartan357 Talk 15:51, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Olds, Dorri (February 26, 2015). "A Journey of Recovery From Eating Disorders". Forward.com. Forward.com. Retrieved February 9, 2021. Hopestarrocker12 (talk) 16:12, 7 July 2021 (UTC) (talk)[reply]
Just being interviewed by a minor paper for an article about eating disorders does not make Prussman notable. There need to be multiple high-quality articles about Prussman as a person. ― Tartan357 Talk 16:20, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
the Jewish Forward is a Major Publication and the article is about Ms Prussman as a person.MIKEmDostee (talk) 16:27, 7 July 2021 (UTC) — MIKEmDostee (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
No, it's not, it's about eating disorders. Regardless, WP:BASIC requires multiple sources. ― Tartan357 Talk 16:33, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
More sources have been added to the article. — AMK152 (tc) 15:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • AMK152, campaign coverage is essentially worthless for establishing notability. I've been through this in many, many AfDs. WP:NPOL requires that people be elected to office, not merely candidates. And as all candidates can show some campaign coverage, that doesn't help get her over WP:BASIC. There needs to be either an unusually large amount of coverage about her campaign, or sources establishing her professional notability independent of the campaign. She would certainly become notable if she wins her election, but people who were merely candidates tend to see their notoriety fade very quickly after losing. ― Tartan357 Talk 17:18, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As a comedian she fits the criteria with many sources MIKEmDostee (talk) 16:42, 7 July 2021 (UTC) — MIKEmDostee (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The !keep votes are not particularly convincing and 2 of them are by accounts that have not made significant edits outside this topic.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bungle (talkcontribs) 20:58, 12 July 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.