Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elijah San Fernando (2nd nomination)

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. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Elijah San Fernando

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:POLITICIAN. Second nomination, deleted per first nomination. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 15:09, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 15:09, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:08, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - some mentions, but not anywhere near enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to pass WP:GNG.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 08:35, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 09:02, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, fails WP:NPOL. CruzRamiss2002 (talk) 13:09, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As per the first time, student regent at a university is not an WP:NPOL-passing office that guarantees inclusion in Wikipedia, and neither is standing as a candidate in a federal election that the subject didn't win — the notability bar for politicians is holding a notable political office, not just running for one and losing, while a candidate must either (a) show that he had preexisting notability for other reasons that would already have gotten him a Wikipedia article anyway, or (b) show a credible reason why his candidacy should be treated as a special case of significantly greater notability than everybody else's candidacies. But this demonstrates neither of those things. Bearcat (talk) 20:55, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NPOL per nom. SBKSPP (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.