- 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 redirect to United States House of Representatives elections, 2018#Colorado. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 15:53, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Mark Williams (Colorado politician)
- Mark Williams (Colorado politician) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Prod removed without comment, not notable as per WP:OUTCOMES and WP:NPOL Gbawden ( talk) 12:46, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 13:05, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 13:05, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- Redirect to United States House of Representatives elections, 2018#Colorado. Redirects are cheap and it points to what he is "notable" for, while preserving the article history if he wins the election. (And if not, redirects are still cheap.) - The Bushranger One ping only 04:14, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
- Redirect per The Bushranger. Being an as yet non-winning candidate in a future election is not a notability criterion — a person has to win the election and thereby hold office to clear WP:NPOL, not just be a candidate in it. But this shows no evidence of preexisting notability for other reasons, and the media coverage is not demonstrating any reason why his candidacy could be considered a special case: it's based entirely on the purely run of the mill local coverage that would simply be expected to exist for any candidate in any primary. As always, no prejudice against recreation in November 2018 if he wins the seat, but nothing here constitutes a reason why he would already get a Wikipedia article today. Bearcat ( talk) 18:03, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- 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.