Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stewart Albertson


 * 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 and redirect to United States Senate election in California, 2016. Randykitty (talk) 19:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Stewart Albertson

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

individual is not notable ALPolitico (talk) 17:37, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2015 March 12.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 17:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. - McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 00:44, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. - McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 00:44, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. - McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 00:44, 13 March 2015 (UTC)


 * DELETE - This isWP:TOOSOON does not meet WP:POLITICIAN or WP:GNG. - McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 00:49, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:04, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:04, 13 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per McMatter. Does not pass WP:42 by any stretch of the imagination. Bearian (talk) 01:37, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Do not delete. Merge/redirect if necessary. Per WP:NOT42, I do not think that an article should ever be deleted on the basis of WP:42. I was under the impression that non-notable candidates were typically redirected to the article on the election per WP:POLITICIAN, which in this case is United States Senate election in California, 2016. James500 (talk) 06:37, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:GNG. Hekerui (talk) 12:30, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Not a notable person. Tiller54 (talk) 18:36, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. WP:POLITICIAN, which is a notability guideline, says: "In the case of candidates for political office who do not meet this guideline, the general rule is to redirect to an appropriate page covering the election or political office sought in lieu of deletion" (my emphasis). Footnote 12 of that guideline then goes on to say that "Deleting a biography in these cases instead of merely redirecting it makes recovering useful information from the page history difficult, and should be done only when there are relevant reasons other than lack of notability for removing the article from the mainspace" (my emphasis again). So I don't see how non-notability can be a grounds for deletion when the notability guideline clearly says in express words that it isn't. James500 (talk) 15:51, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * You have made this argument above and it absolutely a valid argument. Consensus drives this process, WP:Politician is a guideline to help guide consensus but does not dictate it. At this point this article offers nothing worth saving in my opinion, especially since almost the entire history has been revdel'd, after it has been deleted a redirect may be created to the election page.- McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 23:19, 18 March 2015 (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.