Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank J. Vondersaar

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. Sandstein 08:51, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Frank J. Vondersaar

[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)

Non-notable politician. Fails WP:BIO and WP:NPOL. reddogsix (talk) 03:41, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alaska-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:11, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:11, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Obviously fails the conventional WP:NPOL notability criteria, never having actually been elected. There must be a lot of candidates who have run 9 times and not succeeded, so I suspect notability on grounds of unelectability probably isn't sufficient. Neither his military career nor his accusations seem to warrant notability either. Obviously he is well sourced, so it is the additional criteria that are the deciding factor, and they don't seem satisfied. Nosebagbear (talk) 16:56, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete perennial candidate who doesn't pass WP:NPOL. The sources seem to be either obituaries or official primary election results. SportingFlyer talk 21:08, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have added a few more sources. Some are trivial mentions, but not all. To Nosebagbear's point, one of those sources places him as the loosing-est candidate in history. That, plus the fact that he was a major party's nominee, and the various sources, makes him notable. --BrianCUA (talk) 02:44, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looked through the sourcing and there's still not really a lot there - plus major party nominees are not presumptively notable. SportingFlyer talk 03:27, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Running for Congress nine times and losing doesn't even hold a candle to the 95 unsuccessful election candidacies of John Turmel, the worldwide Guinness Book of Records holder for this particular flavour of political notoriety — and even for Turmel, the notability clincher isn't really the candidacies themselves, so much as the fact that Guinness singled him out for the distinction. This article, however, is far too dependent on primary sources that cannot carry notability at all, such as raw tables of election results and archived versions of his own self-published campaign website, and the amount of reliable source coverage actually being shown is nowhere near enough to actually deem him special for having run less than 10 per cent as often as the world record holder did. Being a perennially-losing perennial candidate is not a notability criterion under NPOL, but nothing here is compellingly detailed or compellingly sourced for the purposes of making this one special. Bearcat (talk) 14:16, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete all the coverage is what we would expect in such races, and we have clearly decided more coverage than that is needed to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:44, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I really don’t know what to say here. Frank was a very colorful figure and is well-remembered around here, he comes off in print as kind of paranoid and crazy but he was actually extremely friendly and volunteered for everything under the sun. As for general notability he does seem kind of borderline. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:27, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete - Subject lacks notability. Contaldo80 (talk) 13:46, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Alaska is one of the smallest states, by population, and that may contribute to the dearth on WP:SIGCOV on this perennial candidate. He gets few out of state mentions, for example, in a Washington Post political blog about the year;s worst candidate websites The awful campaign Web sites of 2014, bu tit's a sentence here, a sentence there. Even in Alaska, there wasn't much INDEPTH coverage of him, mostly obits and WP:MILL campaign coverage. This obit in the [Anchorage Daily News] makes him out as a sort of novelty item.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:29, 9 August 2018 (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.