Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Murdough


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 02:01, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Ryan Murdough


White nationalist runs for political office and gets some media attention. Clear WP:NOTNEWS violation. Yephedid (talk) 05:04, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Ongoing significance as he is still the state chairman of his political party. Stonemason89 (talk) 15:49, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * He chairs a minor political party. Big deal. Yephedid (talk) 23:50, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It makes him notable enough for Wikipedia, though. The notability bar for party chairmen is set very low; Jim Clymer, who has never won an election, nonetheless passes the notability standard because he chairs the Constitution Party. Murdough has received more media coverage than Clymer ever did. Stonemason89 (talk) 13:37, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * At least that guy has been around for a while. This guy only appeared briefly in July. Yephedid (talk) 16:17, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's not a valid argument; there's no minimum length of time that someone has to be in the public eye in order for them to be on Wikipedia. Stonemason89 (talk) 18:16, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The duration of coverage is a valid consideration per WP:PERSISTENCE in that it helps differentiate between subjects that are truly notable and things that fall under WP:NOTNEWS. BTW, Clymer has had respectable showings in multiple elections and is the national chairman of an established third party, whereas Murdough is only the state chairman of a lesser known third party that has only been around for three months. Location (talk) 20:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Hampshire-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per guideline at WP:Wikipedia is not a source for election candidate biographies. Fails WP:POLITICIAN. Location (talk) 18:47, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The full policy is: "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article." Which is the case for Murdough. Ergo, he does satsify WP: POLITICIAN. Stonemason89 (talk) 05:04, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I disagree. I interpret a relative blip of routine election coverage in local news sources to fall under WP:NOTNEWS. Location (talk) 11:53, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * They weren't just local news sources; national news outfits (like MSNBC) as well as outstate ones (like the New York Daily News) also ran articles about him. Stonemason89 (talk) 18:57, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Did you actually read what was in MSNBC? One paragraph that quotes three sentences from the Daily News and two from the Concord Monitor. There was no "significant coverage" on the part of any national news source. This was merely a news blip. Location (talk) 19:50, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Failed candidate in a primary (he got 296 votes [ http://www.stormfront.org /forum/t741843/]). "State Chairman" of a trivial-to-nonexistent party which is not recognized by the state of New Hampshire or any other state . When I leave here, I will evaluate the page of that supposed party to see if it passes muster as notable. Mr. Murdough certainly does not. --MelanieN (talk) 03:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The party doesn't either. I have nominated it for deletion. --MelanieN (talk) 04:22, 28 September 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.