Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Davis (Colorado politician)


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 02:57, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

John Davis (Colorado politician)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable individual, he is simply a candidate for political office who has never won or run for anything else, has had no substantive coverage, and seems more like an attempt to create a campaign website. Google hits are not an evidence of notability. Fails WP:POLITICIAN.Gage (talk) 12:06, 14 May 2011 (UTC) — Esoteric10 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep. By your logic, Herman Cain and Fred Karger should also be deleted. From what I can tell, Davis seems to be very serious about running, and is spending (and raising) a lot of money towards that goal. He's also acquired quite a bit of substantive coverage, actually; the sources cited in this article are far from a complete listing of all the articles that have been written about him. Difluoroethene (talk) 13:36, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. The Herman Cain and Fred Karger articles both existed long before the subjects became candidates. Their notability predates their political aspirations. Pburka (talk) 23:46, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Additionally, Cain has appeared in a national debate on Fox News, and Karger has also been interviewed by several national news organizations, including MSNBC. Davis has no notability whatsoever, and simply filing for President does not merit an article, per WP:POLITICIAN. Gage (talk) 02:22, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. There is some coverage, enough to squeak by. I note that the above keep-vote does not really address the issue (his intentions aren't relevant), but perhaps that's beside the point. Drmies (talk) 17:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Per Pburka's comment, the references are largely just obscure newspapers, with no major coverage. Gage (talk) 21:06, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Insufficient coverage to establish notability. I'm only seeing references in fairly obscure papers. If he's a serious candidate for POTUS I'd expect to see coverage in, say, the New York Times or the Washington Post. Instead, I'm seeing the Carroll Daily Times Herald and the Dubuque Telegraph Herald. If his campaign picks up steam the article can always be recreated. Pburka (talk) 23:46, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per Pburka. Esoteric10 (talk) 04:34, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * — Yeah, we may have to discount that vote due to possible sockpuppetry. SOXROX (talk) 03:26, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

— 71.210.202.110 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep. While this gentlemen hasn't attracted much in terms of national media, his tour has been picked up by numerous local media outlets in those areas. - Pictureprovince (talk) 12:21, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Per WP:POLITICIAN: "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability," and certainly only being covered by very minor newspapers does not result in notability. Gage (talk) 03:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. & others, meets neither general notability guideline nor WP:Politician. His sole claim to notability is his campaign, which thus far has garnered attention only from local and obscure media outlets. Currently fails the ten year test.--JayJasper (talk) 16:02, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - non-notable candidate. --William S. Saturn (talk) 17:51, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - We don't need a page for him just because he is simply attempting to get the nomination from a party. If his campaign somehow attracts major attention, then I suppose it could be recreated, but as of now, he is just too minor to be included, and insignificant in all other ways.  Thunderstone99 (talk) 02:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:POLITICIAN. As for some of the above comments, Karger and Cain being covered at least regionally. Cain was in the debate a few weeks ago, and Karger made a big campain to get in the debate- he failed,, but got coverage. This guy has no coveage whatsoever. SOXROX (talk) 03:22, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Also, both Karger and Cain were significant before the election, and both had pages before they began their campaigns. Thunderstone99 (talk) 01:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. FYI, "John Davis for president 2012" gives 1,910,000 Google hits. Difluoroethene (talk) 18:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment See WP:GYNOT for explanation of why Google results are not a reliable measure of notability.--JayJasper (talk) 18:43, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. 71.210.202.110 (talk) 16:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete headline of Muscatine Journal says: "A presidential pipe dream in Wapello". I don't think the coverage establishes notability but mere novelty, and no other, more tangible criteria (like WP:POLITICIAN) are met. Hekerui (talk) 21:26, 20 May 2011 (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.