Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Ereira-Guyer


 * 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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:45, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Mark Ereira-Guyer

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Parliamentary candidate on several occasions, but never elected. Holding a seat on a local council does not confer notablility. Nothing in his business/charity work that seems to warrant an article under WP:N. Most reference refer to his selections and other party activities. Link to Telegraph article now appears dead. Frinton100 (talk) 13:57, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  15:43, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  15:43, 19 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Highest elected office to date is to a regional council a section of Bury St Edmunds a wonderful place, but pop. ~40,0000, and he doesn't represent all of it. He has stood for Parliament, but has not won.  And I cannot find significant  profiles or detailed coverage, nothing really beyond routine, local political coverage.  Flag me if I've missed something.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:22, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. NN local councillor. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:12, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. County council is not a level of office that passes WP:NPOL — a person at this level of political office can get into Wikipedia if the article can be sourced well enough to satisfy WP:GNG, but does not get an automatic inclusion freebie just because he exists. The sourcing here is disproportionately dependent on primary source confirmation of his existence on the website of his political party, self-published sources like his own LinkedIn profile, raw tables of election results and other sources that cannot count toward GNG — and while there are a few legitimately reliable sources in the mix too, there aren't enough of them. Bearcat (talk) 18:20, 21 January 2016 (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.