Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darin Hunzeker


 * Vanity, a CV. RickK 21:53, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)
 * A c&p from this US congress candidate's website (copyvio?). I can't tell whether he's actually a candidate or running from the nomination or whatever. Delete, reinstate if elected. I don't want to see entries for otherwise non-notable candidates for political office any more than I do on 14 year old would-be musicians. Ianb 22:05, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Yup, this is advertising pure and simple and should be removed. Wikipedia does not endorse any brand of cornflakes, kilts or candidates for Congress. -- Derek Ross |  Talk 22:11, 2004 Jul 22 (UTC)


 * Good candidate, running for Congress. There is no reason for deletion. -- Jasonjanofsky


 * Yes there is.


 * 1) Wikipedia is not an advertising medium. We have a policy of deleting advertisements such as this article. We do not endorse products in the way that this article does.


 * 2) Wikipedia has an international readership. Actual members of the US Congress may be of some encyclopaedic interest to us. Wannabe members are not.  And if it's not encyclopaedic it should be deleted. -- Derek Ross |  Talk 22:21, 2004 Jul 22 (UTC)


 * This is definately propaganda and should be deleted. Indrian | Talk 22:41, July 22, 2004
 * Keep, lack of neutrality is a reason for Cleanup, not deletion. More troubling is whether it is a copyvio. - SimonP 23:28, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Subject is not notable.  If he is elected or otherwise becomes notable, a properly encyclopedic article could be considered. Rossami 23:43, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete: Running for office is not notable.  Each election, from city board of alderman to President, will have multiple candidates.  Geogre 00:16, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * We created dozens of articles for candidates in the recent Canadian election (e.g. David Chernushenko, Alan Riddell, Monia Mazigh). I would say that anyone who can get a major party nomination is encyclopedic. - SimonP 02:19, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep with cleanup. I think an endorsed major party candidate for a House election is just notable enough for an article, though this one is less notable as it appears to be a very safe seat for the incumbent.  Still, there is likely to be a substantial amount written about the challenger in the press over the next few months.  If this article is to be kept, the current content is an unacceptable (and should be stubbed until somebody writes a better, non-NPOV article).  --Robert Merkel 02:49, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * I think this is very legit because its a United States Congressional Candidate from a Major party. His information is valid because he won a Primary election in March. Running for congress is no small task. We should give it its due respect by allowing it to be a part of our history. Knowing who this guy is will add to the wealth of knowledge of wikipedia.
 * Who are you? Please identify yourself by signing your comments like the rest of us do.  Anonymous comments on Vfd are not useful.  --Robert Merkel 03:32, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - we've got enough articles on US Representatives just limiting ourselves to the ones who actually have been elected. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 06:18, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. When he wins, he can have an article. Til then it's just an advert. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:23, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Campaign websites are copyrighted. But I would like to take issue with the notion that Congressional candidates are not encyclopedic. They're public figures, voted on by hundreds of thousands of people. I believe all legitimate articles on Congressional candidates should be kept. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 13:13, 2004 Jul 23 (UTC)
 * To clarify--major parties only. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 15:11, 2004 Jul 23 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. I think that the candidates of specific parties are a viable encyclopedia topic. Now, I'd prefer to see a page like Defeated candidates in PA8, 1992-2004, just listing them, but I understand the logic. Lyellin 13:27, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. I do not support articles on every candidate in every election but this is a candidate for US congress from one of two main parties. He will likely get hundreds of thousands of votes, even if he loses. Andris 15:10, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Additionally, didn't this bloke have to win a primary amongst the local Republicans to get the endorsement? Doesn't that take thousands of votes and a big campaign anyway? --Robert Merkel 23:54, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment - the current article is a complete advert, and needs massive pruning. Also a question - does this bloke have any chance of being elected? He's running against the incumbent, and given the polarisation of US politics, for all I know this is in a district where the Democrats could literally nominate a donkey and still win the vote.  Average Earthman 19:54, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * It's a safe Democrat district AFAICT, the incumbent won the last election 63-37, and she's running again. --Robert Merkel 23:54, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Then he's a candidate put up in the full expectation of defeat, and not significant. Delete. Average Earthman 14:14, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity. Bacchiad 21:51, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity. Postdlf 03:39, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)