Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Hartmann

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. T. Canens (talk) 03:25, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Hartmann[edit]

[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)

Created by an SPA account. Subject fails WP:NPOL. GPL93 (talk) 00:15, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:33, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:33, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:33, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:34, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - served County Commissioner and County Campaigner for other politician and not high level elected political position - Fails WP:NPOL. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 10:49, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. County commissioner is not a role that automatically passes WP:NPOL — it can get a person into Wikipedia if the article can be substanced and referenced well enough to clear NPOL #2 as a topic of significantly greater notability than most other county commissioners, but is not a role that guarantees him an article just because he exists. But the sources here consist of one piece of routine local campaign coverage and a primary source that does not constitute support for notability at all, which isn't even close to the quality or depth or range of referencing he would have to show. Bearcat (talk) 16:18, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not appear to meet WP:GNG or any other specific notability guideline. As indicated above, the sources are either primary or routing coverage about the election. --Kinu ^t/_c 16:42, 26 May 2019 (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.