Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fred Mackintosh (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Geschichte (talk) 09:36, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Fred Mackintosh
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

Politician who stood in national elections but was never elected, also a QC, but nothing to indicate enough notability. The page was a redirect for 10 years before being resurrected earlier this year. John Womble (talk) 07:00, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. John Womble (talk) 07:00, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. John Womble (talk) 07:00, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. John Womble (talk) 07:00, 8 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - can't seem to find any significant coverage, so appears to fail GNG and BIO. The only real independent coverage is the "lawyer of the week" article, but that is not significant. I'd be open to the previous redirect if someone can show me that it had some utility. Deus et lex (talk) 10:59, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - I do not think his political career meets notability requirements. He came very close to being elected as an MP in 2010 (and if I recall many political pundits tipped him to gain Edinburgh South for the Liberal Democrats), but that in itself does not make him notable, nor does his service as a councillor. Dunarc (talk) 23:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. People don't get articles just for standing as candidates in elections they did not win — the notability test for politicians is holding office, not just running for it — but this neither demonstrates nor sources any strong evidence that he has preexisting notability for other reasons independent of the candidacy, and also fails to demonstrate a credible reason why his candidacy might have been more notable than the norm. Bearcat (talk) 17:44, 9 December 2020 (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.