Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Stork


 * 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 17:55, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Jim Stork

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Unsuccessful political candidate fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. KidAd  talk  16:37, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:06, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:06, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:07, 6 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete This guy dropped out of the race several months before the general election, so even when we had the absurd rule that major party candidates for US congress were notable, he would not have passed. This is also a very POV-pushing article. It implies that in South Florida having ethnic minorities favors the Democrats, when the largest ethnic minority group in South Florida votes majority Republican. It also tacks on langauge about a court decision 10 years after this guy ran for office that had no direct bearing on any district in the 2000s since it was interpreting a 2010 amendment to the state constitution. This is one of the worst cases of coat-racking I have every implied.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:44, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wilton Manors FL is not a large enough city to guarantee the "inherent" notability of all of its mayors, unelected candidates in congressional elections don't get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates, and this article is referenced nowhere near well enough to claim that he passed WP:GNG and was therefore exempt from having to pass WP:NPOL. Bearcat (talk) 18:01, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable not-politician. SportingFlyer  T · C  20:45, 8 October 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.