- 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 20:38, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Richard S. David
- Richard S. David ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Doesn't seem to meet WP:POLITICIAN (at least not yet) - somebody who has put their name forward for a local council election and nothing else. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:11, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - Local boardmember running for a city council election. Doesn't pass WP:POLITICIAN, and no significant coverage found, so also doesn't pass WP:GNG WikiVirus C (talk) 14:02, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:42, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. , preferably speedyA7, nobody can rationally think that membership on a community board and the mere intention to run for city council is enough to justify an article in an encyclopedia; or speedy G11, since it is obviously intended as a campaign statement. DGG ( talk ) 19:54, 17 July 2017 (UTC) .
- Delete where's the credible claim of significance? Let alone notability. — fortuna velut luna 21:12, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete, no indication or credible claim of notability. Why was speedy deletion declined? Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 23:30, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
- There were sources, which might suggest a redirect or amalgamation to some list article instead of deletion. Maybe. See User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to A7 and Wikipedia:Common claims of significance or importance. Seemed better to have the full chat at AfD - I don't think there's an immediate rush to delete the article. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:52, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. People do not get articles just for announcing their candidacies in future city council elections — if you cannot demonstrate and properly source that he was already eligible for an article under some other notability criterion before becoming a candidate, then he has to win the election, not just run in it, to qualify for an article for his political activity. But this makes no valid claim of preexisting notability, and is based entirely on primary sources with the exception of a single article in a community weekly newspaper — which is not enough coverage to deem his candidacy a special "more notable than the norm" case, either. Bearcat ( talk) 21:50, 18 July 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.