Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Watts


 * 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 of the debate was delete.  K ilo-Lima|(talk) 11:41, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Daniel Watts
Thanks to Elefuntboy for picking this article out.

The user's main claim to nobility is candidacy in the California recall election. There were over 100 candidates, many identifying themselves as Green Party candidates. He could be incorporated into a group article on California recall longshots, since as a collection of eccentrics they were notable, but not as an individual. Delete as vanity.

Lotsofissues 21:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC) ''This AfD is being relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that a decision may usefully be reached. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!''   Proto    ||    type    10:03, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Exceptionally nn, even in this election. Peter Camejo, the primary Green Party candidate, got over 100 times as many votes as Watts, and he only got 3% of the votes cast. Watts finished far behind Larry Flynt, Gary Coleman and porn-actress Mary Carey. Fan1967 22:24, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. --Khoikhoi 05:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think it's a bit of a publicity thing as he's running for AS President. Good reasons listed above, thanks again, lots of issues. Elefuntboy 06:40, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose Deletion First I don't see any evidence of this article being created by the subject, and secondly as a recognize candidate on the ballot, it is of relevent historical nature to allow information on any ofthem to be included. Alex 22:21, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose Deletion It is of relevant historical nature, as the California recall can be seen as an important point in California history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.54.160.176 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete, NN. By that criteria, the names of Tricia Nixon's puppy's first litter are important points in California history, and probably just as many people would care, too.  RGTraynor 20:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. A contestant on Wheel of Fortune who placed 39th in a recall election? Doesn't seem notable to me. Roy  boy cr ash  fan  [[Image:Flag of Texas.svg|30px]] 10:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete his fifteen minutes seem to be up. Just zis Guy you know? 11:02, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Is there a list of candidates from that election? Because methinks that's the only place that merits a mention of this guy. Danny Lilithborne 11:48, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * There's this list, which says he got 0% of the vote. Roy  boy cr ash  fan  [[Image:Flag of Texas.svg|30px]] 12:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete doesn't appear to have been notable at any time MLA 14:13, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Royboycrashfan has it right on the total.CA Sec. of State Getting 2,021 votes out of 8 million cast is not really a notable achievement.Montco 22:36, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete actually according to his website he finished 40th overall, not 39th as the article claims. --Tdl1060 21:16, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This should never have been relisted, four deletes and one keep (discounting the unsigned one) is a consensus. Stifle (talk) 00:08, 13 April 2006 (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.