Talk:Chele Farley

Notability tag

This was moved here from draft space after discussion at the Teahouse here and after it was declined for lacking notability. WP:NPOLITICIAN is clear that merely seeking a political office does not merit someone an article, and I am not seeing how else this person, a local party official, is notable that would merit them an article. There doesn't seem to be(in the article, at least) significant coverage of this person. Most of the sources given are brief mentions and not in depth coverage- or the coverage is related to them seeking office. 331dot (talk) 19:51, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

I would suggest that this be moved back to Draft space pending the outcome of the election. 331dot (talk) 19:52, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't see how she doesn't meet the requirements of WP:BASIC. I've laid out elsewhere numerous articles in reputable and mainstream sources that are substantial coverage of her and nothing else - Farley is the sole focus of the article. I can add them in as additional sources in the references section. How many references do I need to bring? I'm willing to work with you here but there seems to me to be enough coverage to establish notability, and as the election approaches this November, tens of thousands or more people will come to this very article seeking more information. YankeesFan85 (talk) 20:11, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

If there is significant coverage of this person, I am happy to see it. It doesn't seem to be there currently; the most in depth sources on Farley are related to her seeking public office or her local party position, neither of which meets notability. I also noticed that your only contributions to Wikipedia have been related to Farley, are you associated with her or her campaign? Thanks 331dot (talk) 20:22, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

What is significant coverage? Here are a whole bunch of articles that are reputable sources and feature more than superficial coverage of who she is. How many do I have to provide until it counts as "significant" coverage? She has many interviews with local radio stations across the state - I can include those as well. This is a major federal election and deserves to have *basic information* available on one of the main candidates. As to your second question, I don't work for her campaign, I'm just a guy from NY who is mad that our nominee doesn't have an article on one of the biggest websites in the world and doesn't want his fellow NYers to be underinformed come election day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YankeesFan85 (talk • contribs) 20:52, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

As I indicated, those sources are all related to her seeking public office. If she wasn't seeking public office, they never would have been written. And as seeking public office is not considered notable enough to merit an article per WP:NPOLITICIAN, those sources are not enough. Wikipedia is not a voter guide; our primary purpose is to be an encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 21:56, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) YankeesFan85, you write above that This is a major federal election and deserves to have *basic information* available on one of the main candidates. That is not in accordance with Wikipedia policy, specifically with WP:NPOL. Notability could be established by either a) significant coverage for reasons other than her current candidacy, or; b) coverage in significantly greater degree than would normally be expected in connection with such a candidacy. Both of these are judgement calls, and b more or less starts with a presumption against notability. If the sole or primary reason for a person being notable is a candidacy for office, then the coverage would need to be quite exceptional, and some editors will reject notability no matter how much coverage there has been. Recall that notability, once established, is permanent, not just for the length of a campaign. To say that a person is notable is to say that this person should have a Wikipedia article about her forever. Wikipedia is not an election guide. United States Senate election in New York, 2018 presents brief indications of who a candidate is. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:03, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

However, 331dot, WP:NPOL does not bar an article about a candidate, nor does it override the WP:GNG. It says that an article is not automatic for a candidate. If there is sufficient coverage, even if it is all election-related, that there will probably be enduring notice taken; and in particular if the coverage is rather more than might be expected for J. Random Candidate for the same office, then an article should be valid, even if there are no other grounds for notability. At least that is my view. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:08, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

• Currently, i don't think the cited sources, plus the ones listed above by YankeesFan85, are sufficient to establish notability. I haven't done a through WP:BEFORE search, and so I won't nominate for deletion at this time. I would favor a redirect to United States Senate election in New York, 2018 at this point, however. I also note that at least two curently cited sources in the article don't mention Farley at all, and don't support what they are cited for. This does not add credibility to the article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:13, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Both the citations you flagged directly reference Farley - the link to the Stanford page demonstrates that she (under her maiden name Chiavacci) is in fact an alumna of the university, while the link to the Questbridge site lists her third on the East Coast Advisory Board section. Also I would like to note that one of the articles I provided (in Town and Country) was written prior to her candidacy and in no way references it - it is completely independent of the events of this election and presumably Town & Country decided that Farley was notable enough prior to her campaign to be featured in it in a feature length story. YankeesFan85 (talk) 22:29, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

(ec) I am aware of exceptions like Christine O'Donnell, but I don't think this person rises to that level, nor am I convinced that she meets GNG. I am only asking that the article be moved back to draft space(where it was declined by one reviewer) until the election is decided. 331dot (talk) 22:17, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

YankeesFan85, since the article does did not list her birth name in the lead section(as it now does), I did not connect the listings under that name with the subject of the article. In any case the Stanford page, while saying that she is an alumna, does not list her degree or graduation date, so it does not support the sentence it is cited for. The Town and Country article does not seem to me to do much for notability, as it is primarily about her husband and says little about her, and in any case a single source almost never establishes notability. But it is a start. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:45, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

This article should be redirected to United States Senate election in New York, 2018, per WP:NPOL and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes. We do not want or need campaign brochures on Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:31, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Added additional sourcing

I added additional sourcing to demonstrate that there are a significant number of reputable and independent media outlets covering Farley, and therefore firmly believe that she qualifies as notable under WP:BASIC. There are many more sources that I can add in which the primary focus of the article discusses her political beliefs, personal history, etc but have not yet included in order to avoid an appearance of reading like a campaign website, even though such a section is normal for many politicians (I am more than wiling to expand this section if others think it is appropriate, and there are many sources in mainstream outlets to gather this information from). I'm happy to work with whoever else wants to help improve this article, as I believe that Farley has demonstrated that she has received significant coverage all across a state of 20 million people and that the major party nominee for a US Senate seat is a notable enough person to have an article here, and that only being a subsection in United States Senate election in New York, 2018 would be inadequate. YankeesFan85 (talk) 14:41, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

I read all of your added sources, YankeesFan85, aside from the Town & Country article, which I addressed above, they are all fairly routine coverage for a candidate in a senate race. You say ... the major party nominee for a US Senate seat is a notable enough person to have an article here. But that is exactly the problem, the current consensus is that such a person is not considered sufficiently notable here on Wikipedia. The City & State NY article says about Farley: Farley’s name may be unfamiliar to most New Yorkers not acquainted with New York City Republican fundraising circles...} which is almost like a banner saying "Not yet notable person here!". I am still included inclined to redirect this, but since there is oppostion to such a course, perhaps it should be proposed at an AfD. @Cullen328 and 331dot: what do you say? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:40, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

I would recommend redirecting at any such AfD, as I have done for many other political candidate biographies. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:16, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

AfD is the way to go. We've exhausted the consensus-building methods at our avail here on this talk page. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:20, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

The article in Resident Magazine precedes any announcement of a run for Senate. Additionally, I don't understand yet how WP:NPOL is not superseded by WP:BASIC in this specific case - no, a person is not notable solely because they have declared themselves a candidate for elected office. However, when coverage of Farley in mainstream and reputable publications now exceeds the requirements of WP:BASIC many times over, I would think she has reached a certain threshold. Furthermore, to quote WP:NPOL, "although such people 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". How is what I have presented not "significant coverage"? I have provided upwards of 20 sources in reputable publications and can provide even more, including longer radio interviews that contain significant amounts of both her background and policy plans. YankeesFan85 (talk) 20:32, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

YankeesFan85, the argument is that since merely being a candidate does not demonstrate notability, as per WP:NPOL, if coverage that would normally be expected for any candidate were considered to satisfy WP:BASIC, then most candidates would be in effect automatically notable. Therefor, something significantly more than the "expected" coverage is needed to demonstrate notability, or else coverage that is unconnected with the person's candidacy. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Little (engineer) where I argued the other side of this, but there was a clear consensus to delete redirect. I will be nominating this at AfD and suggesting redirection, in line with that precedent, but I will also bring up the issues you have raised, and link to this discussion. Thank you for your efforts on this, and please do make the best case that you can in the AfD discussion.

The Resident Magazine article, by the way, is entirely concerned with her appointment as New York City Finance Chair for the NYC Republican party. This is a purely local party office, of interest primarily to political insiders, and the coverage is fairly routine for such an appointment. If she were not a candidate, and the only sources presented with the Town & Country article and this one, I don't think anyone would seriously argue for notability.

Of course, should she win the election, she would become notable at once, and the redir (if that is done) could be undone in a click. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:30, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

I would support making this a redirect, but keeping the text as a draft in case she wins(which is unlikely, but....) 331dot (talk) 00:24, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Note that if this is made into a redirect, 331dot, the history would still be there and the redirect could be returned to the last version of the article with a simple revert at any time. Even if it were deleted any admin could undelete it if it were justified, which it surely would be should Farley win the election. There is no need to keep a separate draft page for that possibility. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:52, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

I have now nominated this at AfD, See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chele Farley for further discussion. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:52, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Okay, that's fine with me; I have just seen that done in another situation, Draft:Dan DeBono (Candidate). 331dot (talk) 00:57, 20 June 2018 (UTC)