Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Horace Hillis

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. Consensus is for deletion. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:04, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Horace Hillis[edit]

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

Not notable; minor party candidate for governor, etc., but fails WP:GNG. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:59, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Mz7 (talk) 21:30, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Mz7 (talk) 21:30, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NPOL and no other claim to notability. AusLondonder (talk) 00:59, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Almost none of what very limited text exists can be substantiated. If editors can bring in additional cites, I'd reassess this stance. Bangabandhu (talk) 22:39, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable failed political candidate.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:56, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Being a non-winning candidate for political office, even at the state gubernatorial or US senatorial levels, is not an automatic WP:NPOL pass in and of itself. At some particularly high levels of office it can be enough for an article if the person can actually be sourced over WP:GNG for it (or for something else that would have cleared a different notability standard anyway), but it does not entitle a person to keep an article that says only that he existed and is sourced only to The Political Graveyard. No prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can locate much more substance and much more sourcing about him than this, but this as written simply isn't even close to getting him over the inclusion bar. Bearcat (talk) 16:26, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Can not find many references on the internet which can support this page.Politekid (talk) 20:08, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete can't find reliable sources.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:37, 23 February 2017 (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.