Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William "Dock" Walls III


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 02:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

William "Dock" Walls III

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:POLITICIAN as a failed candidate who hasn't held office, doesn't otherwise meet WP:GNG – Muboshgu (talk) 17:38, 26 February 2011 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:45, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:47, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Unsuccessful political candidate who fails WP:POLITICIAN. Cullen328 (talk) 04:14, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Unsuccessful political candidate who fails WP:POLITICIAN. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  08:56, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep I think the refs at the bottom need to be weeded out (no YouTube) and wikified (inline), but with proper wikification there might be an encyclopedic article worth keeping.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:49, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * (Very) Weak Keep. Notability is thin on the ground, here. I think the bit about the petitions (having more signatures than Mayor Daley) just barely inches the article past the post - but only just. Some improvements are obviously necessary, including what ended up happening in the most recent election. I've found a source to add, and will do so momentarily. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 13:52, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think ballot signatures are notable. Besides, the link provided after that sentence goes to some other page, not an article providing that detail. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:21, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * No, that's not a good link. If there were coverage of it, I think it'd work - but the only possible mentions, other than the fact that Walls was indeed a candidate, are behind paywalls. Hrm. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 17:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:20, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete He got some press coverage by notable sources, but overall his notability is not asserted by the article. Kind of a borderline case however. Jaque Hammer (talk) 10:44, 12 March 2011 (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.