Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manish Sood


 * 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   merge to United Kingdom general election, 2010. Shimeru (talk) 00:35, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Manish Sood

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

- This has been the main story on major UK News programmes all day today, and is likely to become a significant point in History in terms of recapping the election Campaign. Given that senior Political figures on all sides have commented on this story, I feel it should be kept.

A politician notable for nothing other than being an electoral candidate, thus not notable per WP:POLITICIAN Mattinbgn\talk 10:53, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Nonsense. He's notable for his comments as per paragraph above. He'd be notable for these comments whether he was a polician or not. Therefore WP:POLITICIAN is argueably irrelevant. --Rebroad (talk) 20:02, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

He has made the AP (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gahKY7HXorsj8sIK4aQIout6N5Jw) with his story, the BBC (cited in the article), and the Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brown-worst-ever-pm-says-labour-candidate-1961848.html), not just as part of the article, but as the headline. jptreen —Preceding undated comment added 11:40, 4 May 2010 (UTC).


 * Keep. His comments had some relevance for the campaign. --82.181.95.21 (talk) 12:23, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge this is a clear case of WP:ONEEVENT. Any useful info from this stub should be included in North West Norfolk (UK Parliament constituency) as is standard practice per WP:POLITICIAN. Valenciano (talk) 13:55, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It depends. If he still stands as an independent, having been sacked by Labour, then I say keep, and, obviously if he wins the seat, however unlikely it may have seemed until now (he could get a shock sympathy vote), or even just beats Labour, I suggest that the article is kept. Otherwise, Merge into constituency as per Valenciano's suggestion.--Vox Humana 8' 15:38, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Pending - will have to make decision based on election results (which could make this AfD moot if elected, if not, then there's room for debate).--137.122.49.102 (talk) 18:53, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:03, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * A lot will depend on whether this incident gets any attention after the election. However, if no further coverage comes up be the close of the debate, Merge and Redirect to United Kingdom general election, 2010 as a WP:BIO1E. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 19:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Wait a day. In the unlikely event he wins election, obviously keep; otherwise, merge to North West Norfolk (UK Parliament constituency) (or United Kingdom general election, 2010) as a WP:BLP1E. Robofish (talk) 19:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep He's gotten a second round of major press for his refusal to attend his own vote count. Highly likley to be a search term for many, both now and in the future Vartanza (talk) 19:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - that's still just part of the elections and thus falls under WP:NOTNEWS and WP:POLITICIAN.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 21:15, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - District Councillor = NN; failed parliamentary candidate = NN. Summary NN.  Being disowned by his own party during the election is hardly notable.  I oppose merger with the constituency, because these articles have a lot of more substanive content.  Possibly, some one will think it worth a brief mention in an article on the evnts of the election, but I doubt it.   Will any one remember him in 6 months?  Peterkingiron (talk) 21:44, 8 May 2010 (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.