Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike O'Brien (Michigan 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 Merge. (non-admin closure) Jinkinson   talk to me  23:06, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Mike O'Brien (Michigan politician)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No-office political candidate that lost a 2012 election; strongly non-neutral and article abandoned after election. Probably does not meet Notability (people) but difficult to tell yet because of all the political spam and polling coverage. Closeapple (talk) 01:19, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge into United States House of Representatives elections in Michigan, 2012, as the person doesn't seem to be separately notable; he's just another candidate who lost against incumbent Fred Upton in one of Upton's numerous elections. It has 38 references, but it seems like the vast majority of the sources are of the kind that aren't worth much for notability: (1) pure self-sourced campaign advertising material and "biographies" from conflict-of-interest political organizations; (2) updates about polls from time to time during the election season, not biographical material; (3) announcements of campaign stops; (4) short mentions in multi-candidate summaries during campaign season.  It appears that the user who was behind this non-neutral article didn't even believe in the article except as a temporary campaign tool: He simply abandoned Wikipedia when it appeared that the candidate wasn't going to win.  The only valid edit since the 2012 election was an uninvolved user adding one line mentioning that this person lost. --Closeapple (talk) 02:18, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Without large amounts of biographical coverage, candidates for congress are not notable. An example of a notable candidate for congress is Mia Love. Of course, she had a biography before she announced any intention of running for congress. I know, I created it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:33, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the article on the election (even if the standalone article were deleted outright, he'd still be at least mentioned in that one anyway, so a redirect is legitimate). Unelected candidates do not warrant coverage in Wikipedia just for being candidates; John Pack Lambert is exactly correct that having already established notability before becoming a candidate for Congress is the primary way in which an unsuccessful candidate for Congress can actually get over our notability bar. Bearcat (talk) 01:19, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  07:38, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge per Closeapple. Unelected politician. Carrite (talk) 17:55, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Bearcat. Tiller54 (talk) 16:56, 12 July 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.