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 delete. Vanamonde (talk) 21:26, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kristin Gaspar (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)

This looks like a case of a person not meeting WP:POLITICIAN. Subject's only political office is to a county Board of Supervisors (I don't think this meets the subject-specific requirements, but check me if I am wrong here). I did find this which is not directly related to her candidacy, and the editor who created the article has an edit history that goes back to 2016 and has over 600 edits, so probably not an undisclosed paid edit, but discussion of her outside of the election cycle seems thin. A loose noose (talk) 03:00, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:43, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:44, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:44, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails WP:NPOL with no coverage outside of routine local coverage. AusLondonder (talk) 09:42, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. County supervisors are not handed an automatic free pass over WP:NPOL #2 just because they exist, and neither are unsuccessful candidates in party primaries — but with just a small handful of local media hits not even slightly out of proportion to what every other county supervisor in North America could always also show, this isn't showing the depth or breadth or range of reliable source coverage needed to make a county supervisor more notable than the norm for a not inherently notable class of topic. Bearcat (talk) 15:24, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:NPOL.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:14, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:NPOL, WP:GNG. SportingFlyer talk 02:45, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Meets GNG and WP:BASIC in that multiple articles published in reliable sources by journalists have devoted significant coverage (over a dozen paragraphs each) to her. WP:AUDIENCE only applies to organizations, and WP:ROUTINE to events. It is irrelevant whether this amount of coverage is higher or lower than the average amount received by an American county supervisor. FourViolas (talk) 14:32, 18 September 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.