Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lenny McAllister


 * 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   no consensus. Listed for 13 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator but not enough comments to establish a consensus. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 22:58, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Lenny McAllister

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

While this is a lengthy article, there is actually no notable material here. Just a guy who blogs and attends conferences. LeilaniLad (talk) 03:59, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Newschoolpolitics (talk) 04:17, 20 July 2009 (UTC)This is a guy with a book coming out, a leading young Republican, and a leading Black man in America that is not in the Democratic Party. He is a leading blogger in the country and is a leading young Republican with a growing following. Here is just one article of several that was done on him http://www.charlottemagazine.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7506

Also he appears regularly on XM Radio and other media outlets. Just again on Anderson Cooper 360 Thursday. He is speaking out on race with the Republican Party more than the rest. This guy is legit. I will put notations in here starting tomorrow. This article should not be deleted though, so please do not delete it.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I found some sources:, , , , , . A few are trivial mentions, but #1 definitely is not. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:17, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete per WP:BLP. There is quite a bit of unsourced contentious information about this living person. I won't preclude recreation if it can be properly sourced to follow the policy. MuZemike 06:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the Charlotte Magazine source given by Newschoolpolitics demonstrates notability. As for BLP, any contentious material should be removed from the article but deleting the whole thing is a last resort and doesn't seem at all necessary here. Olaf Davis (talk) 11:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll read over it again, but I think at a minimum there is quite a few negative material that needs to be removed, including all the unsourced material about his controversies. I punched in delete because it looks like it's scattered all over the place (that and it was about 2:00am yesterday morning when I punched that one in). I'll strike the !vote but leave the comment. MuZemike 18:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've also asked for input at WP:BLPN as to what should be removed. MuZemike 18:46, 27 July 2009 (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.