Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Kearns Goodwin

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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:48, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Kearns Goodwin[edit]

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

Person only notable for one event (an unsuccessful state senate campaign) and for his famous parents. Hirolovesswords (talk) 11:20, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:11, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unelected candidates for political office do not get Wikipedia articles because candidate — if you cannot demonstrate and properly source that he was already notable enough for a Wikipedia article for some other reason before becoming a candidate, then he must win the seat and thereby hold office to become eligible. And neither does a person get a Wikipedia article just for having famous parents, as notability is not inherited. The Bronze Star, however, is not an honour that gets a person over WP:MILPEOPLE in and of itself — and the only other potential claim of notability here, that he's written for the media about his military service, is sourced entirely to content where he's the bylined author of the piece rather than independent third parties writing about him. So no, nothing here clears the "belongs in an encyclopedia for it" bar. Bearcat (talk) 17:32, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Sorry, this person isn't notable. Someone who didn't even become a candidate to be a State Senator fails WP:POLITICIAN by a country mile. No significant coverage of his charitable ventures since 2012, so it looks like he has faded into becoming a regular private citizen again. Blythwood (talk) 19:22, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- nothing that suggests notability. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:27, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete by all means, nothing at all here convincing. SwisterTwister talk 02:37, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete He is an unelected politician who happens to be the son of two very notable people, but having notable parents does not make him notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:22, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No indication of notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:48, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable for stand alone article; trivial. Kierzek (talk) 19:47, 5 August 2016 (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.