Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Edward James


 * 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. If his campaign gains traction, presumably there will be better coverage and we can revisit this then. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:52, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

John Edward James

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet WP:NPOL as a candidate for US Senate, no other claim of notability. Power~enwiki (talk) 01:30, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. North America1000 03:53, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 03:53, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. North America1000 03:53, 25 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. As of right now, he isn't even a general election candidate yet, but merely a candidate in a party primary. This is not a notability claim that gets a person into an encyclopedia in and of itself, however, and nothing else here properly demonstrates that he would have been eligible for an article for any other reason. And for added bonus, this is plainly written more like a campaign brochure than an encyclopedia article. Obviously no prejudice against recreation on or after election day 2018 if he wins the seat, but he doesn't get an article just for being a candidate in the primary. Bearcat (talk) 16:16, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete winners of party nominations who receive significant coverage may be notable (but passing human interest type coverage clearly not, especially when the actual positions of the candidate are so unnoticed as to not be explored, eg Misty Snow), but candidates who have declared for a primary where final determination of who will be on the primary ballot is still 9 months away, the primary election is more than 11 months away, and the general election is 15 months in the future, are clearly not yet notable. If elected James will be notable, and he may become notable if he gets significant, sustainted, indepth coverage while running, but he clearly does not at present pass notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:46, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep James is a major candidate for the Republican senate nomination in Michigan. In addition to his background being worthy of a wikipedia page, he has drawn a wide swath of national media attention. He is a major candidate for a major position who has drawn national attention, so he clearly has the notability and the relevance to maintain a page. Easily meets WP:GNG. The page does however need improvements. MountMichigan (talk) 00:59, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you have evidence of national attention? All the references in the article are from Michigan, and Google doesn't show much obvious. If he did have substantial national coverage, obviously he'd be notable, but you still have to show evidence. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:55, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Let's see this "wide swath of national media coverage"—relisted for a week


 * Response to Colapeninsula A quick Google search yields examples of national attention for John James: Daily Caller, Washington Examiner, another Daily Caller, and a mention in the The Hill.MountMichigan (talk) 20:55, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar  04:10, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:POLITICIAN. Especially the 3rd criteria. Vanity article beyond that. X4n6 (talk) 04:41, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete I couldn't find any references about him with his career Mr.ref (talk) 15:29, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Stipulating WP:POLITICIAN "being a candidate is not notable," I do think James passes the further "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article" test simply because his background made him a candidate worthy of media attention in places like Politico and Black Enterprise in addition to other coverage linked above. A relatively young African-American West Point grad Army vet and businessman running as a Republican for the U.S. Senate is unusual enough that it attracted media notice, hence notability. (Also agree that the page needs serious work to fix quality issues if it's kept.) Jmozena (talk) 16:28, 7 September 2017 (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.