Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Keniston


 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:17, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Chris Keniston

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Only rationale for article seems to be that this individual is running for President of the United States. This does not provide the necessary level of notability for an article. ALPolitico (talk) 15:16, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep He is the nominee of a notable party (Veterans Party of America) which is on the ballot in the general election at least one state so far.--Cojovo (talk) 19:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * comment: In addition to my comments above, I wish to note WP:POLOUTCOMES: "losing candidates for office below the national level are generally deleted unless previous notability can be demonstrated." Keniston is obviously a candidate at the national level, one with certified ballot access in the general election.--Cojovo (talk) 19:29, 12 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - This discussion was created without the afd2 template and never transcluded to a daily log. Fixed now--I offer no opinion on the nomination itself at this time.  -- Finngall   talk  00:36, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 01:57, 3 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete: non-notable political candidate. Quis separabit?  02:33, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: Not notable. His party is only barely notable, and article contains practically nothing outside running for president. JDDJS (talk) 02:55, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  14:23, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  14:23, 3 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete doesn't seem to meet notability guidelines for inclusionSir Joseph (talk) 14:49, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * While the US presidential election is that rare beast that's so widely covered that a candidate who fails NPOL still has a chance of passing WP:GNG anyway, that fact does not confer an automatic inclusion freebie on everybody who happens to be a minor party candidate for president: the volume of substance and sourcing still has to actually satisfy GNG before they're eligible for an article. US election history is literally overflowing with people who were nominated by a minor party, or even independently declared themselves, as a candidate for president, but who then actually satisfied the ballot access requirements in only one, two or even zero states — so we simply cannot confer an automatic presumption of notability on every person who can be described as a candidate for president. But this, as written, is a 58 word blurb that's parked on one primary source and media coverage in just two minor media markets, one of which is local to the town where he lives — and those local sources would still exist regardless of what office he was running for, and thus can't help to establish notability as such. Neither the sourcing nor the substance here are enough. Delete, or redirect to Veterans Party of America, without prejudice against recreation in the future if the volume of media coverage ever increases enough to surpass GNG. Bearcat (talk) 17:29, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Veterans Party of America (as was done originally) per Bearcat.--JayJasper (talk) 20:43, 5 March 2016 (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.