Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stuart Starky


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:38, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Stuart Starky

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable political candidate. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. Political candidates do not get Wikipedia articles as party nominees for office. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:03, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:03, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:03, 26 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - Fails GNG. Missvain (talk) 23:42, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. Best, GPL93 (talk) 13:37, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails GNG though could pass in the future. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs )~ 18:42, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. People do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates in elections they did not win — the notability test at NPOL is holding a notable political office, not just running for one. To be notable enough for inclusion here, an unsuccessful candidate must either (a) already have preexisting notability for other reasons that would already have gotten them an article anyway, or (b) be referenceable to such an unusual depth and range and volume of media coverage that he has a credible claim to his candidacy being much more special than everybody else's candidacies. But this is referenced 75 per cent to an indiscriminate and unreliable directory of political candidates, which is not support for notability at all, and the few sources that are real media coverage do not add up to enough media coverage to make his candidacy a special case. Bearcat (talk) 01:32, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Failed candidates do not meet WP:NPOL. Bkissin (talk) 14:52, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete perenial failure candidates are over and over not notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:38, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:POLOUTCOMES. I would keep as a perennial candidate, but that is not the ongoing consensus. Bearian (talk) 21:19, 30 January 2020 (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.