Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Craig Huey


 * 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   keep. Courcelles 03:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Craig Huey

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable defeated candidate who fails the criteria in WP:POLITICIAN. The only news coverage of the guy are news stories that cover all the candidates or news stories in his local press. OCNative (talk) 05:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep candidate may have lost but is notable in his own right as a direct marketer who has pioneered several techniques and won national awards as described in the article already. He is also notable for his three websites which aid Christian voters in casting their ballots. Notable as a candidate because he had national attention and national media coverage for his unique campaign ads. In the immediate future allegations of voter suppression may result in additional national coverage . Finally, it remains to be seen what Huey's prospects for running again for congress are - with 2010 census redistricting, he may run again, and very soon. Thus a decision that he is non notable as a failed candidate is clearly premature. But again, regardless of whether he runs in a new district, he is notable for his business and Christian political website activities. KeptSouth (talk) 06:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete failed candidate for public office, sources almost exclusively centered on election, plus he did not receive the one award mentioned by name, but a firm did, and the award page itself is only sourced via its own website, making me question the notability of these awards (they appear like promotional tools). Huey's supposed achievements in business are sourced with the website of the company he founded, which is not a reliable source. Hekerui (talk) 08:39, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * DELETE 71.96.10.54 (talk) 11:52, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Massively source article, easily clears GNG. The obsession of many with wiping out substantial biographies of politicians who happen to lose an election is a strange one and very detrimental to the comprehensiveness of the encyclopedia. Carrite (talk) 14:16, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - As above, well-sourced, well-written, very encyclopedic article. I can't see how its removal improves the project. -- Esprqii (talk) 16:53, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep In addition to his run for office, there is coverage of his business activities going back a couple decades:. Qrsdogg (talk) 17:21, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - This is a well-sourced article, and Huey is notable for having gotten into the runoff as a conservative Republican in a heavily Democratic district.Bgoldnyxnet (talk) 19:12, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - I'm a Democratic activist from the surrounding area, and I think Huey is notable enough to merit inclusion due to his political and business activities. The article about the election will be severely decimated if this article is removed.--A Second Man in Motion (talk) 04:44, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not an argument that you're a Democratic activist and saying he's notable doesn't demonstrate it. Why don't you argue "why"? Hekerui (talk) 07:24, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're not the one who's going to determine whether this article stays or not, so keep your smart-ass remarks to yourself. If you didn't understand that I said that "the article about the election will be severely decimated if this article is removed" by the removal of an article about one of the candidates and that being a Democratic activist from the surrounding area means that I've seen his political and business activities first hand and thought him notable enough to merit inclusion, even though he's of a different political persuasion then myself, then there's no helping you, pal. But go ahead with your efforts of trying to be a big man online.--A Second Man in Motion (talk) 22:47, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 14 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Overwhelming coverage from a variety of third-party sources means he easily passes WP:GNG. CharlieEchoTango (talk) 04:16, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep--there's a large amount of well-sourced third-party coverage of this guy. Although losing candidates aren't automatically notable, "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"." Huey clearly passes this test. Meelar (talk) 20:22, 17 July 2011 (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.