Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Schlakman

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.

Ian Schlakman (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)

This article fails

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly
  Talk to my owner:Online 22:16, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:25, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:25, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unelected, minor party candidate with no notability that the
  WP:NPOL.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:39, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete and Redirect to
  WP:NPOL. Flesh out information about the candidates in the election article. Bkissin (talk) 18:24, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep it, the article has more than 5 sources, and it is about a candidate for Governor of one of the States of the United States, the importance of the article is implicit in the importance of the event.--Leglish (talk) 23:34, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Same thing as
  talk) 04:38, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Delete. People do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates in elections they have not yet won — no, not even at the gubernatorial level. To qualify for an article, he would need to (a) win the election, (b) already have a strong claim to preexisting notability for other reasons, besides the candidacy itself, that would already have gotten him an article on those grounds anyway, or (c) receive so much more coverage than most other candidates across the United States are also getting that there would be credible grounds to claim his candidacy as a special case over and above most other people's candidacies. But none of those things are shown here at all — and the fact that a bit of campaign coverage exists is not a free
  WP:GNG pass that exempts a candidate from having to pass NPOL just because of that campaign coverage's existence, because every candidate always gets some campaign coverage, so every candidate would always get that free pass and NPOL would automatically be gutted as having no applicability at all anymore. Bearcat (talk) 22:37, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Redirect Just like Shawn Quinn (politician), merely being a candidate is not enough for notability. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 22:18, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, then redirect per Bkissin. SportingFlyer talk 00:15, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and Redirect to
  WP:NPOL. Ifnord (talk) 03:39, 8 November 2018 (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.