Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Eichenlaub


 * 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. As pointed out by delete !voters, being a candidate to an office is not generally enough by itself. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:28, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Ed Eichenlaub

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete. WP:BLP, written like a campaign brochure and poorly sourced as usual, of a person notable only as an as yet unelected candidate in a future election. As always, candidates do not get Wikipedia articles because candidate -- if you cannot demonstrate and properly source that he was already notable enough for a Wikipedia article for some other reason independent of his candidacy, then he does not qualify for a Wikipedia article until he wins the seat and thereby holds a notable office. No prejudice against recreation if he wins in November, but nothing here demonstrates or sources that he has the preexisting notability necessary to already have an article today. Bearcat (talk) 21:04, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 21:07, 10 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete He is an as yet unelected candidate. If he wins the election he will be notable, but he is not yet.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:20, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep The reason why I deem this politician notable is because of the fact that he is the official candidate for the Democratic Party and so he currently holds a position. He is the official representative for Pennsylvania's State Senate District 37 in the general election by way of an electoral process; he won his primary election on April 26th, 2016. Mattmccarry (talk) 05:53, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * — Mattmccarry (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * "Candidate in a future election" is not a role that gets a person an encyclopedia article — and that remains the same regardless of whether the candidate is a Democrat, a Republican, a Green, a Libertarian or an independent. Unless you can make a credible and properly sourced claim that they were already notable enough for an article for some other reason besides being a candidate, they do not become notable enough for an article until they win the general election in November — winning a primary election to become the "official" candidate is not enough, because "candidate" is not a "position" or an "office" or an encyclopedic claim of notability. We are not a venue for aspiring politicians to post their campaign brochures; we keep articles about people who hold seats in the legislature, not everybody who runs for one. Bearcat (talk) 15:03, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:08, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jujutacular (talk) 00:50, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete -- does not bee NPOL being an unelected candidate. The subject is otherwise non notable; coverage is trivial and local at this point. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:52, 18 August 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.