Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Woods

Ian Woods
This article is associated with an unsuccessful candidate whose attempt is documented in the associated election results article. The article seems to be non-notable and was flagged for cleanup.


 * Keep. As a general rule, I'd suggest that anyone who campaigns the Canadian House of Commons is eligible for an entry on Wikipedia (and, besides which, Woods seems to have the potential for an interesting bio.)  This page needs a cleanup; it doesn't need to be deleted.  CJCurrie 00:20, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I presume if this person had run for office on a Star Trek episode it would be fine to keep them. The Recycling Troll 04:47, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. In this year's election, he received 145 votes (0.27%). Not remotely notable on those grounds. Average Earthman 10:11, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree with Average Earthman. --Improv 12:33, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep it - this person was on the ballot in a real election. That's notable enough. Intrigue 19:45, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wiki is the only place you'll find this info. Kevintoronto 20:53, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. I once ran for class president, can I have a page? Get real!! Not notable Awolf002 21:00, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Ummm... I don't want to pass judgement on your school, but I feel pretty comfortable saying that the Canadian Parliament is more notable than your high school class. What's next? Are you going to put up a VfD for Canada?Kevintoronto
 * I knew somebody would read my comment that way! No, I'm saying that being on a ballot does not make you notable just by itself, you must be notable for other reasons, in my oppinion.Awolf002 18:07, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * keep running for the Canadian House of Commons is a bit more notable than running for class president. This guy has run before and will likely run again which means it'll be an empty link from a future election page if deleted. Add some more info (such as ridings run in).AndyL 23:00, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete for reasons given for deleting other non notable losers of Canadian elections. Also a comment that a lot of the 'keeps' for these non-entities come from CJCurrie and people he's paged to get to support him. Jongarrettuk 23:10, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Your second reason isn't sound. It's perfectly acceptable practice on wikipedia for editors to contact other editors and ask them to intervene in a discussion. That is one aspect of WIkipedia being a "community" rather than some sort of atomised environment. AndyL 00:27, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * The guy's notable beyond simply being a failed electoral candidate; he's the publisher and editor of a small but internationally recognized political magazine. I've added some context to the article, so I guess my vote is to keep. Bearcat 23:29, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep for Bearcat's reasons, even though winning an election for class president is more notable than failing to win in a federal election. You don't need to be notable to fail at that. Anyone can get their name on the ballot. Jallan 00:57, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mikkalai 04:56, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete until they achieve something. GWO 18:26, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - you're just jealous u didnt get as far as ian woods did...get over it guitar 01
 * keep there are tons of articles just like this one. And this guy has ran on more than one occaison. If you run in more than one election, I say it warrants an article. Earl Andrew 21:10, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)