Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Austin (politician)

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Eugene van der Pijll 14:15, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Steve Austin (politician)
Non-notable politician. Only ran for one office, in 2005, garnering 0.5% of the vote in the June primaries. ral 315  18:14, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable Soltak 18:47, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete at one-half of a percent of the vote, doesn't even seem to have been a "serious" candidate. I will say, though, that that is one of the meanest-looking politician pictures I've ever seen.  He could stare down the other Steve Austin any day. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  19:39, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. My dad ran as an independent a few years back and got 8%, and even he isn't anywhere close to deserving an article.--Frag 21:13, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a repository of every fact known to mankind. Gaius Cornelius 15:28, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep strongly. Proposer has moved that Austin and other candidates in the June 14th primary be removed on the grounds they did not do well.  He has an article so to make a complete record of the election.  I do not think it fair to decide legitimate candidates for an important office do not merit articles because they did not do well in the campaign.  Some of those he proposes for deletion have won local offices (e.g. Eric Minamyer) and if we delete them, then we'll have to prevent nearly all local officials from getting any attention at all.  PedanticallySpeaking 14:44, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete He doesn't need an article to make a complete record, just have his name added to the list of candidates. We don't decide the important candidates, the voters do. And other candidates should be discussed on other pages. DJ Clayworth 14:48, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for reasons stated at Votes for deletion/Peter Fossett. -R. fiend 15:59, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge for reasons given at Votes_for_deletion/Peter_Fossett. --JamesB3 16:25, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * [s]Merge. See opinion on VfD/Peter Fossett. (Just a few more to vote on...) Aerion//talk 04:01, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete--candidates this minor are not notable. There's no way he deserves his own article, as opposed to being mentioned in a table listing the results. Meelar (talk) 13:45, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Keep. AGree with PedanticallySpeaking.

Academic Challenger 05:56, 16 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.