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. A redirect can be created after she's mentioned at the redirect target. Sandstein 07:50, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Joanna Penn (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)

lacking notability Hughesdarren (talk) 13:35, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:05, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:05, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:06, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• You were expecting a delete vote but actually it was me, Dio! Comment. I previously nominated this for PROD on the premise that it does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. It was dePRODed by an editor who claimed to have found many more sources by searching for "Jo-Jo Penn"–following this advice, I found these two articles [1] [2] in The Australian, one of which tantalizingly described an epic showdown between Penn and May in the Google preview. Unfortunately I don't have a subscription to The Australian and can't access the articles to confirm that there is significant coverage there between the two of them. All in all, I have yet to actually see the kind of coverage necessary to meet GNG (and even if the Australian pieces are relevant, that means we have a running total of one RS giving significant coverage, which is technically not enough on its own), but there's a chance that there's some better coverage behind paywalls. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:41, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect. She has gotten some recent press, and I suspect she will be clearly notable shortly (IBC listing. Until more press arises to make the case less on-the-fence, however, I think redirect to Second May ministry or Premiership of Theresa May would be sensible. 66.198.222.67 (talk) 18:48, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Second May ministry for now, with no prejudice against recreating if she becomes more notable in the future. Can't find enough in-depth coverage at present to show they pass WP:GNG, and they don't qualify for WP:NPOL.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:23, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• She's not mentioned in Second May ministry. (not watching, please ((ping)) as needed) czar 17:31, 13 January 2019 (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.