- 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 Independent Party. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
AfDs for this article:
- Evan Falchuk ( | 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 a person whose only substantive claims of notability are as an unsuccessful candidate in an election and as the brother of a more notable television producer. While the content here is written differently enough from the original version that I can't justify speedying it as a recreation of deleted content, his notability hasn't gotten any stronger under WP:NPOL and the volume of sourcing still isn't enough to claim WP:GNG instead. It's still either a delete, or a revert back to the redirect that resulted from the first discussion. Bearcat ( talk) 03:26, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:26, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:26, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:26, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect to United Independent Party, which does seem to pass the notability bar and already mentions the subject. PWilkinson ( talk) 22:44, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 03:40, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 03:40, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - does not meet WP:NPOL or WP:GNG criteria.-- Rpclod ( talk) 20:36, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep – has received significant coverage for his gubernatorial campaign as well as his efforts to get a statewide ballot question on the proposed 2024 Olympics. -- Hirolovesswords ( talk) 19:13, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
- Most of the sourcing here just namechecks his existence in the process of failing to be about him — and the media are required to cover all candidates in an election taking place in their coverage area on "equal time" grounds, so campaign coverage falls under
WP:ROUTINE unless it erupts into a firestorm on the order of what happened to
Christine O'Donnell. If campaign coverage could get a person into Wikipedia in and of itself, we'd have to keep an article about every single person who ever ran for village dogcatcher.
Bearcat (
talk)
17:18, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
- [1] [2] [3] [4] all provide more than mere "namechecks". Furthermore, he has continued to receive coverage since his campaign [5] [6], which means, unlike "every single person who ever ran for village dogcatcher", he is notable enough for a standalone article. -- Hirolovesswords ( talk) 00:25, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
- Most of the sourcing here just namechecks his existence in the process of failing to be about him — and the media are required to cover all candidates in an election taking place in their coverage area on "equal time" grounds, so campaign coverage falls under
WP:ROUTINE unless it erupts into a firestorm on the order of what happened to
Christine O'Donnell. If campaign coverage could get a person into Wikipedia in and of itself, we'd have to keep an article about every single person who ever ran for village dogcatcher.
Bearcat (
talk)
17:18, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect to United Independent Party - campaign statements are not creating notability for unelected candidates, the two sources taht mention him after the election are connected to his party activities, no stand-alone article warranted yet, per WP:NPOL, and fails WP:GNG Kraxler ( talk) 18:33, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect to United Independent Party - He does not appear to be notable in his own right (most of the coverage is minor regarding him personally, and would be considered routine reporting of a candidate's details) PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 12:02, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- As a lawyer, he would fail my standards. Delete. Bearian ( talk) 13:30, 28 July 2015 (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.
- 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 Independent Party. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
AfDs for this article:
- Evan Falchuk ( | 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 a person whose only substantive claims of notability are as an unsuccessful candidate in an election and as the brother of a more notable television producer. While the content here is written differently enough from the original version that I can't justify speedying it as a recreation of deleted content, his notability hasn't gotten any stronger under WP:NPOL and the volume of sourcing still isn't enough to claim WP:GNG instead. It's still either a delete, or a revert back to the redirect that resulted from the first discussion. Bearcat ( talk) 03:26, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:26, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:26, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:26, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect to United Independent Party, which does seem to pass the notability bar and already mentions the subject. PWilkinson ( talk) 22:44, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 03:40, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 03:40, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - does not meet WP:NPOL or WP:GNG criteria.-- Rpclod ( talk) 20:36, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep – has received significant coverage for his gubernatorial campaign as well as his efforts to get a statewide ballot question on the proposed 2024 Olympics. -- Hirolovesswords ( talk) 19:13, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
- Most of the sourcing here just namechecks his existence in the process of failing to be about him — and the media are required to cover all candidates in an election taking place in their coverage area on "equal time" grounds, so campaign coverage falls under
WP:ROUTINE unless it erupts into a firestorm on the order of what happened to
Christine O'Donnell. If campaign coverage could get a person into Wikipedia in and of itself, we'd have to keep an article about every single person who ever ran for village dogcatcher.
Bearcat (
talk)
17:18, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
- [1] [2] [3] [4] all provide more than mere "namechecks". Furthermore, he has continued to receive coverage since his campaign [5] [6], which means, unlike "every single person who ever ran for village dogcatcher", he is notable enough for a standalone article. -- Hirolovesswords ( talk) 00:25, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
- Most of the sourcing here just namechecks his existence in the process of failing to be about him — and the media are required to cover all candidates in an election taking place in their coverage area on "equal time" grounds, so campaign coverage falls under
WP:ROUTINE unless it erupts into a firestorm on the order of what happened to
Christine O'Donnell. If campaign coverage could get a person into Wikipedia in and of itself, we'd have to keep an article about every single person who ever ran for village dogcatcher.
Bearcat (
talk)
17:18, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect to United Independent Party - campaign statements are not creating notability for unelected candidates, the two sources taht mention him after the election are connected to his party activities, no stand-alone article warranted yet, per WP:NPOL, and fails WP:GNG Kraxler ( talk) 18:33, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect to United Independent Party - He does not appear to be notable in his own right (most of the coverage is minor regarding him personally, and would be considered routine reporting of a candidate's details) PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 12:02, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- As a lawyer, he would fail my standards. Delete. Bearian ( talk) 13:30, 28 July 2015 (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.