Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Acklin (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Deor (talk) 07:24, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Kevin Acklin
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Flash-in-the-pan never-elected local politician - see WP:BLP1E. While there was coverage of the guy during his candidacy, that's it. He's resumed a staff job and is now occasionally quoted but no in-depth coverage outside of losing that race. Failed AFD 5 years ago, but his notability fails the test of time, and he remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. The Dissident Aggressor 19:05, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:POLITICIAN. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  21:04, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:21, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:22, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:22, 27 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia's sourcing and notability standards are much stricter now than they were five years ago. The first AFD hinged on the idea that he had generated sufficient coverage in reliable sources to pass WP:NPOL #3 — but that criterion was never meant to cover people who only garnered WP:ROUTINE coverage in the context of a single candidacy for an office they didn't win. All candidates in all elections always garner local media coverage — so if that was all it took, it would be impossible to maintain any standards for politicians' notability at all. I'm sure he's a good guy, but nothing here makes him a person who warrants coverage in an encyclopedia — he's just a WP:BLP1E whose only substantive claim of notability is coming in third in an election where even the second place finisher doesn't have an article despite garnering at least as much coverage as this guy got. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 07:36, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, notability standards have actually stagnated and ossified over the last several years. I don't think there has been much change, one way or the other, since 2007, apart from a few new SNG dealing with small numbers of edge cases. James500 (talk) 11:23, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Badly fails WP:POLITICIAN, WP:POLOUTCOMES and WP:N. BritainD (talk) 08:49, 31 October 2014 (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.