- 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 Prohibition Party#Electoral history. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 00:50, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- Mark R. Shaw ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Virtually unsourced biography of a person notable only as a non-winning minor party candidate for political office. Being an unsuccessful election candidate is not a notability claim that passes WP:NPOL, so the only other path to keepability is to properly source him over WP:GNG as notable for some other reason -- but the only "sources" here are The Political Graveyard and a profile on the website of his own political party, meaning all we've got here is one unreliable source and one directly-affiliated one. Bearcat ( talk) 02:03, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 13:05, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 13:05, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 13:05, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - per above, agree it fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL, and I couldn’t find independent sources to add anything notable on him either. There’s just nothing about him that warrants his own page. Shelbystripes ( talk) 14:35, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Note: I would also support redirect as described below, if that helps build consensus. Shelbystripes ( talk) 23:16, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Redirect to Prohibition_Party#Electoral_history. WP:NPOL suggests that redirects are appropriate for losing candidates for a federal office. While there is not a great redirect target, such as list of Prohibition Party Vice Presidential Candidates, the electoral history of the party, or the United States presidential election, 1964, would direct a reader to information about the subject's vice presidential campaign. -- Enos733 ( talk) 15:59, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Delete or Redirect -- He was clearly a very persistent candidate for a minor party with little prospect of election. The general rule is that failed political candidates are NN. That does not apply to major party presidential candidates, but they are usually notable for other reasons already: most are senators or governors first. Donald Trump is of course an exception. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:56, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Redirect per the above. Jclemens ( talk) 06:53, 9 October 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.
- 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 Prohibition Party#Electoral history. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 00:50, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- Mark R. Shaw ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Virtually unsourced biography of a person notable only as a non-winning minor party candidate for political office. Being an unsuccessful election candidate is not a notability claim that passes WP:NPOL, so the only other path to keepability is to properly source him over WP:GNG as notable for some other reason -- but the only "sources" here are The Political Graveyard and a profile on the website of his own political party, meaning all we've got here is one unreliable source and one directly-affiliated one. Bearcat ( talk) 02:03, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 13:05, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 13:05, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 13:05, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - per above, agree it fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL, and I couldn’t find independent sources to add anything notable on him either. There’s just nothing about him that warrants his own page. Shelbystripes ( talk) 14:35, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Note: I would also support redirect as described below, if that helps build consensus. Shelbystripes ( talk) 23:16, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Redirect to Prohibition_Party#Electoral_history. WP:NPOL suggests that redirects are appropriate for losing candidates for a federal office. While there is not a great redirect target, such as list of Prohibition Party Vice Presidential Candidates, the electoral history of the party, or the United States presidential election, 1964, would direct a reader to information about the subject's vice presidential campaign. -- Enos733 ( talk) 15:59, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Delete or Redirect -- He was clearly a very persistent candidate for a minor party with little prospect of election. The general rule is that failed political candidates are NN. That does not apply to major party presidential candidates, but they are usually notable for other reasons already: most are senators or governors first. Donald Trump is of course an exception. Peterkingiron ( talk) 17:56, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Redirect per the above. Jclemens ( talk) 06:53, 9 October 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.