Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mimi Soltysik 2016 presidential campaign


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Mimi Soltysik. Liz Read! Talk! 02:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Mimi Soltysik 2016 presidential campaign

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Not a notable campaign by any stretch of the imagination, got fewer votes than several candidates without pages including Kotlikoff, La Riva, Kennedy MoMoChohan (talk) 20:28, 01 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2024 April 2.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 00:41, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG notability is not determined by how many votes a candidate receives but by the extent of media coverage received. There are plenty of sources in the article.--User:Namiba 01:03, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete - Merge to Mimi Soltysik, per Reywas92 comment below. According to Socialist Party USA, he got only 4,061 votes nation wide. In other words, 0% overall. Also, most of his bio already covers his political views and activism. — Maile  (talk) 01:13, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Can you cite the guideline which discusses the relevancy of vote totals when discussing notability?--User:Namiba 01:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Politics, United States of America, California, Colorado, Michigan,  and Wisconsin.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  04:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep - the amount of votes a candidate got is irrelevant. What is relevant is their coverage in multiple reliable sources, and this article passes WP:GNG. The article is a little brief, but that can be fixed at the article and is not a valid reason for deletion. I am not aware of a guideline about vote totals being a determiner of notability either. Bandit Heeler (talk) 05:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Merge to Mimi Soltysik. The coverage of an unknown fringe candidate is not significant enough to warrant a separate article for the campaign. I see no reason why these sources can't be included there. Reywas92Talk 13:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, and have changed my position above. Thanks. — Maile  (talk) 14:14, 2 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete there's no meat on the bone here. There are a couple articles which note appearances, but I think SYNTH is an issue and I don't think this passes GNG. SportingFlyer  T · C  17:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Comment - This is deletion nomination #2. The first one was a keep Articles for deletion/Mimi Soltysik presidential campaign, 2016. — Maile  (talk) 23:13, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * That was a WP:BADNAC that no one called out, consensus was clearly to merge. SportingFlyer  T · C  23:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Merge per @Reywas92, the campaign itself is not independently notable but no reason the information cannot be retained in the subject's main article. It is a short article and has little to say apart from the campaign itself. The previous result was keep/merge, we should now just actually do it.
 * Jtrrs0 (talk) 15:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Merge with : Subject does not meet the WP:GNG as a standalone article. A merge to Mimi Soltysik makes sense as a WP:ATD. Let&#39;srun (talk) 21:08, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete While the number of votes received is not directly relevant to notability, it can be an indication that a seperate article is unnecessary, and over-coverage. Any relevant content should be merged with Mimi Soltysik. AusLondonder (talk) 22:29, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Merge as suggested. Bearian (talk) 15:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Merge to Mimi Soltysik per Reywas92 and WP:NOPAGE. Sal2100 (talk) 16:47, 6 April 2024 (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.