Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hank Eng


 * 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. /No consensus to delete. Another re-listing not likely to bring about one. Possible merging can be discussed on the talk pages. StarM 21:28, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Hank Eng

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The prod tag removed, but I still think this article should be deleted - a very minor political figure who lost his race in Colorado. Though his accomplishments are many, none of them are notable and he remains a very obscure individual. Article also reads like an ad, which is a leftover really from the election. Descartes1979 (talk) 20:54, 16 November 2008 (UTC) 
 * Comment I won't take an opinion here because I just deleted about 80% of the article, in particular, the part of 'views', which is hard to prove and likely violate WP:BLP. They also violated everything about spam and NPOV that I could think of.  Now the article is smaller and looks more in line with a typical Wikipedia article.  He was a candidate, there are some sources, I will let everyone else figure out what that means.   D ENNIS B ROWN  (T) (C) 21:36, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   —  D ENNIS B ROWN  (T) (C) 21:38, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 01:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 01:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:21, 21 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge/Redirect to United States House of Representatives elections in Colorado, 2008 per WP:ONEEVENT. Non-trivial RS coverage comes exclusively from running for office. • Gene93k (talk) 01:44, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Major party candidate for a national office. Running for office over the course of a year is significantly different from standing for office on a party list in an election whose cycle spans only a few weeks. RayAYang (talk) 02:44, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 15:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge/redirect to United States House of Representatives elections in Colorado, 2008, as per Gene93k's rationale of this being a one event man who would otherwise not be notable for inclusion. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 16:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per above rationale --Alpha166 (talk) 18:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Would you mind providing some rationale? —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 20:32, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong keep. I strongly feel that being a major-party candidate for national office -- whether it be the presidency, the House, or the Senate, and even if the candidacy is unsuccessful -- immediately makes individual notable enough to have their own Wikipedia article. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 00:09, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep It takes substantial success at politics to achieve a major party nomination for national office in a 2 party system . such people are notable, & there will always be news stories about at least the campaign., and usually the prior career, though they may still be only in print. I used to be almost the only person saying this as a general rule, but consensus can change, and I see that it has. DGG (talk) 23:06, 28 November 2008 (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.