Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christine Hallquist

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. Well I feel there was an excellent case of Pile-On consensus that there was sufficient non-candidate coverage to satisfy GNG in a myriad of sources. (non-admin closure) Nosebagbear (talk) 21:11, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Christine Hallquist (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Clearly fails WP:POLITICIAN as a political candidate not (yet) elected. StAnselm (talk) 05:07, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep WP:POLITICIAN states: "… an unelected candidate for political office … can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of 'significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article.'" As shown by references in BLP to The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Boston Globe, Christine Hallquist meets that criterion. KalHolmann (talk) 06:55, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I agree that the articles in the Washington Post, New York Times, and Boston Globe establish WP:GNG, and hence justify the article with no need to justify WP:NPOLITICIAN. I've checked in the UK and find coverage in The Guardian, The Independent, and BBC news on her. I think this is a case where WP:BEFORE should have been applied more robustly. Ross-c (talk) 09:37, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with Vermont gubernatorial election, 2018 Keep Changed vote per all comments added before and after mine. Redditaddict69 09:55, 17 August 2018 (UTC) 13:36, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep As stated earlier, he general coverage for her in the news has been far more substantial than other gubernatorial primary winners, and a cursory reading of many of these articles establishes an argument for notability in accordance with WP:GNG.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 13:45, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Passes WP:GNG and does not fall under criteria 2 and 3 of WP:BLP1E (she is currently not a low profile individual, the event and her role in it is well documented.) Rab V (talk) 18:35, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Rab V (talk) 18:38, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep Its not about WP:POLITICIAN as she passes WP:GNG. Probably passed GNG even before the nomination, given her gender transition while CEO, and the subsequent film.--Theredproject (talk) 18:46, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the above. Maybe most unelected candidates aren't notable, but there are exceptions. XOR'easter (talk) 21:11, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the above. Also, trans visibility. I believe that Hellquist is the first openly trans candidate to be voted into office in the US. RachelWex (talk) 23:17, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@RachelWex:: Christine Hallquist has not been voted into office. The 2018 Vermont gubernatorial election will take place on November 6, 2018. In January 2018, Danica Roem became the first openly transgender person to both be elected and serve in any U.S. state legislature. KalHolmann (talk) 23:47, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep When I put this article together I was pretty sure she met WP:GNG. She's not just notable for the election results, they just tipped the scale, she's also been the subject of an award-winning film, and digging her company out of bankruptcy (both of which are in this article). So, I don't think WP:BLP1E applies. I specifically started this article because her name was redirecting to Vermont gubernatorial election, 2018 and I thought there was a basis for a full article. Jessamyn (talk) 23:25, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:SIGCOV in these media sources with national or international circulation:

1. The London Times: "Christine Hallquist becomes first trans person to run for US governor"
2. The Independent: "Vermont primary: Christine Hallquist becomes first transgender candidate to win governor nomination for major party"
3. The Sydney Morning Herald: "US primaries: Democrat Christine Hallquist becomes first US transgender nominee for governor"
4. Berliner Morgenpost: "Transgender-Kandidatin Christine Hallquist tritt bei US-Gouverneurswahlen an"
5. Der Tagesspiegel: "Christine Hallquist als Kandidatin: Erste trans Frau kandidiert bei Gouverneurswahlen in den USA"
6. The Globe and Mail: "Transgender candidate Christine Hallquist wins Vermont governor’s primary"
7. Le Journal de Montreal: "Christine Hallquist pourrait devenir la première femme transgenre à devenir gouverneure"
8. The Week: "With her win, Vermont's Democratic nominee for governor Christine Hallquist made history"
9. Mother Jones: "Christine Hallquist Just Became the First Transgender Nominee for Governor From a Major Party"
10. Rolling Stone: "Christine Hallquist Becomes First Trans Candidate to Win Major Party Nomination for Governor"
11. New York Magazine's Daily Intelligencer: "Christine Hallquist Could Be First Transgender Governor"
12. National Review: "Christine Hallquist: ‘Historic’ Transgender Gubernatorial Nominee Should Give Us Pause"
13. Elle: "How a Group of Muslim Girls Inspired Christine Hallquist to Run for Governor"
14. The New Yorker: "Christine Hallquist’s Vermont Win and the Emergence of Transgender Politicians"
15. Vox: "Vermont primary results 2018: Christine Hallquist could become the first transgender governor"

WP:BLP1E no longer applies for this person. She is no longer a low-profile individual. She has given several television and print media interviews. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:19, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:30, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Obvious keep per above. Hallquist has attained significant coverage. The nominator claims that the article should be deleted due to WP:NPOL, but if they'd actually read WP:NPOL, they'd know that this article should be kept. Davey2116 (talk) 18:28, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per coverage above. First trans person to run for governor, even if Hallquist loses, is significant. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 17:50, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The usual outcome for a candidate for elected office is a redirect to the appropriate election page, usually because all the coverage of the subject is within the context of one event WP:BLP1E. However, there are a certain number of exceptions that exist to the usual outcome. In this case, there is significant international coverage of her campaign, as well as feature length articles and other media about the subject's transition. (As an aside, the article in its present form does not over-emphasize the subject's run for governor and focuses on her professional career). --Enos733 (talk) 19:24, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Significant media coverage around the world to satisfy WP:GNG, an important article of significance to Transgender History in the United States. Digestive Biscuit (talk) 19:57, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep stong coverage by lots of mainstream media.Τζερόνυμο (talk) 06:36, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Former CEO of an electric cooperative. To my mind, that would make her notable in any event. HangingCurve^{Swing for the fence} 23:16, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep Why is this even a question? Whoisjohngalt (talk) 21:17, 22 August 2018 (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.