Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Critz

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

Pennsylvania's 12th congressional district special election, 2010. Content may be merged at editorial discretion. Regards, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 00:24, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Mark Critz

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unelected politician - fails

WP:POLITICIAN Codf1977 (talk) 16:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. —Codf1977 (talk) 16:35, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, he's the party candidate in a federal election and has gained some notoriety nationwide after the death of John Murtha, whose seat he's running to win. Wrightchr (talk) 16:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(

WP:POLITICIAN guidelines ? Codf1977 (talk) 16:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply

3. Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article." Due to the fact that this candidate does IMHO have significant coverage and is running in a special election which will draw national attention, much to the same as Scott Brown in Massachusetts. Wrightchr (talk) 17:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Scott Brown analogy doesn't apply as Brown is a state senator thus meeting notability criteria independently of the special election. Valenciano (talk) 14:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Agree with Wrightchr, except for Wrightchr's
WP:POV pushing. — Timneu22 · talk 16:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. -- --Darkwind (talk) 17:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe I'm running a

Tim Burns. Wrightchr (talk) 17:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Merge to
WP:POLITICIAN the content can be branched out again into its own article. Valenciano (talk) 17:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Merge/redirect to
Mkativerata (talk) 19:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

MergeI agree completely with Valenciano. Tyrol5 [Talk] 23:19, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect. I'll go with the merge because the guy isn't notable on his own. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:26, 4 May 2010 (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.