Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Conservatism

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Conservatism. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Conservatism|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Conservatism. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Conservatism/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Conservatism

Semi Bird

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

This article cites a lot of sources, but they're nearly all about his gubernatorial campaign or recall, and the rest are from local outlets about actions taken by the school board while he was in office. At least 6 of the sources are just election results. Just implicitly, I don't see how running for governor and getting recalled from his school board position make him notable enough for a Wikipedia page. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 15:09, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Yes, a failed political candidate isn't notable, the article seems to focus on the various "controversies", wearing masks, faking the diver's badge... I don't see notability based on scandals alone. A school board position isn't quite NPOL. Oaktree b (talk) 15:25, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Conservatism, and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:32, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I think he meets WP:BASIC. Bird is a fairly major Republican in Washington State, there is significant coverage on him as a person as well. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 00:49, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, clearly fails NPOL and does not meet the general notability guideline. I doubt he will have enough lasting coverage to satisfy the latter, given how early his campaign fizzled out. Sounder Bruce 05:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, earning a Purple Heart in connection to his other exploits should IMHO grant him the needed notability. Biohistorian15 (talk) 10:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC) @BottleOfChocolateMilk has made a valid point below. I hereby withdraw my vote.[reply]

I understand what you're saying but it's worth pointing out that nearly 2 million people have received a Purple Heart. While it's a point towards his notability, it's worth keeping in mind that it's not *that* uncommon. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 14:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to 2024 Washington gubernatorial election. He is not even his party's chosen candidate for the election, having lost in the primary. (Not that that would matter, because candidates in and of themselves are not inherently notable per WP:NPOL). Per SounderBruce, I don't know that this has the long-term significance to pass the ten-year test. Biohistorian15 makes a good point about Purple Heart status, however most Purple Heart recipients have more significant coverage of their actions which led to them being awarded the honor. However, given the subject's past accusations of stolen valor and falsifying information, information about the applicant's Purple Heart would need to be verified. Bkissin (talk) 13:54, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The nom and @Bkissin are right. I changed my mind. Will strike my vote out above. I was not aware that up to 2 million individuals have received it; and verifiability is another matter indeed. Biohistorian15 (talk) 14:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]