Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Detch

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. Sufficient consensus. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 19:49, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Detch[edit]

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

WP:BLP of a person notable only as an as-yet-unelected candidate in a future election. As per WP:NPOL, this is not a claim of notability that gets a person into Wikipedia in and of itself -- if you cannot demonstrate and source that the candidate was already notable enough for a Wikipedia article for some other reason independently of his candidacy, then he does not become notable enough for a Wikipedia article until he wins the election. But this makes and sources no credible claim of preexisting notability for anything besides the candidacy itself -- and as usual, fully half the article is pure "campaign brochure of his positions on the issues" rather than factual content about anything that warrants the attention of an encyclopedia, and the sourcing is too reliant on primary sources, with the reliable and independent sources being neither numerous enough nor non-local enough to claim that he passes WP:GNG anyway. Delete, without prejudice against recreation in November if he wins. Bearcat (talk) 15:52, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 22:54, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of West Virginia-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 22:54, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:14, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Seems to be WP:PROMOTIONAL. Definitely WP:Too soon. Insert CleverPhrase Here 06:17, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom, a candidate for office must be independently notable prior to their candidacy. AusLondonder (talk) 15:06, 11 March 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.