Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Muldoon (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. The significant arguments to keep were based on the notion that candidates for national office are or should be notable, though consensus from previous discussions as per the WP:POLITICIAN guideline, is that failed candiates are not notable.  SilkTork  *YES! 02:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Patrick Muldoon (politician)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Only claim to notability is that this person is a candidate for a nomination in an election, which under WP:POLITICIAN does not count as notability. Prod tag removed without explanation as part of an edit supposedly correcting the person's education. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 15:31, 5 April 2009 (UTC) *Keep - He has been in politics for a long period of time and is an important politician ofVirginia. --Juliaaltagracia (talk) 01:56, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  --  I 'mperator 16:27, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Subject was a major party nominee for US House of Representatives in 1996. There is AfD precedent for claiming notability in such cases, I believe. At the very least, he is not a WP:ONEEVENT candidate. Rklear (talk) 20:14, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Which precedent is this? My reading of WP:POLITICIAN is that being a candidate, major party nomination or not, does not count unless it is for a national or first level sub-national office. If there's substantial media coverage as a result of being a major party candidate, that might be a different matter, but I don't see how a nomination on its own counts, even for the US House of Representatives. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 20:24, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The policy does not define "first level sub-national office." Does a state-wide Lt. Governor race in one of only two states that are having an election in the year after the Democrats' sweep (with the accompanying national attention) count? Racepacket (talk) 02:50, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Merely a candidate. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  22:36, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 *  Comment  Can his information not be merged and redirected, until he has (or if) actually won his seat?Ottawa4ever (talk) 02:18, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Good point, I'd forgotten about that. You could redirect to Virginia's 9th congressional district. The only snag is that, at the moment, this article doesn't contain any information about past elections, only the list of Congressmen actually elected, so the redirect wouldn't make that much sense at the moment. But if someone wants to include the list of previous candidates in elections, no objections to a redirect. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 07:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:POLITICIAN and being an unsuccessful candidate for US Congress is not reason to keep. Valenciano (talk) 05:19, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep While we have not always done so, we ought to keep the articles for major party candidates for national office once they win the primary. There will always be enough local news coverage, though it may still be hard to find. DGG (talk) 13:31, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Failed candidates simply do not meet WP:POLITICIAN per ample precedent, and I really see no reason to change that. Getting a nomination, even from a major party, isn't really enough, because if we're being honest about it at least two-thirds of these guys had no real shot at actually getting elected (do we really think this guy is notable for getting 10.6% of the vote?), and I'm probably being conservative with that stat. Besides, in general failed candidate bios are a classic case of WP:ONEEVENT, even if arguably the potential Lt. Governor nomination negates that in this case. BryanG (talk) 17:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep I believe that this is an unusual case because having an incumbent challenged from the right during the candidate selection process may affect the nominee's position in the general election. The nominating process is described in Republican Party of Virginia, but it seemed appropriate to have the biographical and background details of both Muldoon and Bolling in separate articles.  I believe we should retain the article at least through the end of May.  If he loses the election, then WP:ONEEVENT would probably be grounds for deletion.  The race has drawn the attention of numerous political blogs, but I did not include cites in the article out of WP:RS concerns.  At first, I thought about merging this content into the Bill Bolling article, but opted for a separate article to avoid the appearance that Wikipedia was establishing a juxaposition out of political bias.Racepacket (talk) 20:11, 6 April 2009 (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.