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. Michig ( talk) 19:11, 2 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Briony Penn

Briony Penn (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

WP:BLP of an activist and unsuccessful election candidate, not referenced to enough reliable source coverage to deem her notable for either endeavour. This is far too dependent on primary sources rather than reliable ones, and even the few reliable ones aren't cutting it: one is from a local community pennysaver covering her only in the context of a speaking engagement in that community (which is not evidence of encyclopedic notability), one glancingly namechecks her existence within coverage about somebody else, and one is simply a piece of WP:ROUTINE coverage of her announcement that she was running in the election she didn't win. Otherwise, all we have here for sourcing is her "staff" profiles on the websites of organizations she's directly affiliated with, the self-published websites of minor literary awards that aren't notable enough to confer a WP:AUTHOR pass if the best source that can be provided is their own self-published websites, and one activism award whose source is also self-published by the granter of the award, and fails to actually support the claim at all. So no prejudice against recreation in the future if someone can do better than this, but this sourcing isn't cutting any mustard and nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her sources from having to cut mustard. Bearcat ( talk) 20:24, 7 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ^{Baby miss fortune} 14:27, 8 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. ^{Baby miss fortune} 14:27, 8 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. ^{Baby miss fortune} 14:27, 8 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. ^{Baby miss fortune} 14:28, 8 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. ^{Baby miss fortune} 14:28, 8 February 2018 (UTC) reply

• Keep I'm not sure if she's notable as a politician (and she has retired from politics), ^[1] but she does appear to be a notable environmentalist and has written an award-winning book. I updated her article with citations. Her environmentalism and a stunt she pulled while dressed as Lady Godiva was widely noted ^{[2] [3]} and her book The Real Thing: The Natural History of Ian McTaggart Cowan won a Roderick Haig-Brown Regional Prize. ^[4] I'm not sure if it matters, but I also noticed she has several of her works published on Google Scholar. ^[5] Lonehexagon ( talk)

• Weak Keep not notable as a politician, but there appears to be enough coverage as an author to meet WP:GNG. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 18:11, 22 February 2018 (UTC) reply

• Keep - she's passes as an author. ^{Atsme 📞 📧} 18:12, 23 February 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.