Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leonard Jones (American 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. Yunshui 雲 水 08:12, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Leonard Jones (American politician)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Minimally sourced biography of an eccentric political fringe candidate, not demonstrating that he has enough reliable source coverage to get over WP:GNG for it. This is referenced entirely to a single news article in a single organizational newsletter, which is not enough coverage to make a person notable all by itself if it's the only source you can show. Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have a lot more coverage than this. Bearcat (talk) 03:15, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 03:15, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 03:15, 12 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment as article creator. I totally can't recall how I ended up at the original source (a blog website), but I was apparently editing the "List of people claimed to be immortal" article at the time, so it must have come up as part of that?  Eh, 2008 was a different era on Wikipedia.  Anyway, that source lists the book "Offbeat Kentuckians" as the source, but that doesn't appear to be a particularly high-quality source.  The primary source articles seem to be legit enough to indicate that this article is not a hoax or a non-existent person, but I'll certainly grant that they are an exceedingly minor character, the equivalent of the TimeCube guy.  I will say that "politician" is probably misleading disambiguation; while they apparently were a perennial candidate, their notability is specifically in being an eccentric / quack peddling biological immortality.  I can't claim there's any huge gain to keeping this, but I also think it's pretty harmless as is.  SnowFire (talk) 03:43, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:31, 13 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete not anywhere near enough sourcing to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:49, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - a single source from an unreliable source. If he'd really been notable, he'd appear in political histories or folklore tales. Compare Emperor Norton. Bearian (talk) 18:39, 16 September 2019 (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.