Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Woods (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. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:14, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Steve Woods (politician)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable politician. Woods was a local town councilman who attempted to run for wider office on several occasions (state senate on two occasions and governor on another). In all contests, he dropped out or lost during the primary process. The coverage he received is not beyond the standard level of local coverage any candidate might expect, but as he never managed to win any of his larger races, I'd argue that he does not meet WP:NPOL. As an aside, and probably largely unrelated, the article was recently PROD'ed with the rationale that "The person listed in this article no longer wishes it to be published." That PROD was declined (by me) as an invalid reason to delete the article, but further examination of its actual content lead me to this AFD nomination. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:52, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:52, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:52, 16 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Serving on the municipal council of a town with a population of less than 10K is not an automatic pass over WP:NPOL #2, and only one reliable source here is actually covering him in that context, which is not enough to make a smalltown municipal councillor a special case over and above most other smalltown municipal councillors. And people don't get Wikipedia articles just for being unsuccessful candidates, either — if a person doesn't win election to, and thereby hold, an office that passes NPOL #1, then he has to already have had preexisting notability for other reasons, and the amount of sourcing shown here for the candidacies is, once again, not nearly enough to make his candidacies somehow more notable than most other candidacies. And nominator is correct that "the subject doesn't want an article" isn't a valid reason for prod, because sometimes that has been tried by people who have a strong enough notability claim that we have to overrule their wish — but per WP:BIODEL it can be taken into account in an AFD discussion if a genuinely strong notability claim isn't really in play, and nothing here is a particularly strong notability claim. Bearcat (talk) 16:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete doesn't meet NPOL per Bearcat; no claim of meeting GNG apart from the coverage of failed political campaigns. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 23:05, 17 April 2018 (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.