Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Craig Varoga

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. MBisanz ^talk 23:46, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Craig Varoga[edit]

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

An American campaign strategist of dubious notability. Eleassar ^{my talk} 10:12, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I found these: [1][2][3]. However, the latter two seem to be more about the organizations he is associated with rather than him as a person, and the first one is simply insufficient coverage. Sure, he's quoted substantially in the media, but that is not enough for an article, either. GAB^Hello! 21:37, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTRESUME and WP:MILL. I'm a former Democratic committeeman and consultant myself, and keep up to date daily on partisan politics, and like the lead says there's a reason I've never heard of him. He truly is up and coming. Bearian (talk) 18:51, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not only is this a case of lacking any secondary sources, it is a case of original research desgined to cover the coordinated activities of one individual. There is a place for such original research, but it is in an investigative report in a newspaper. If such gets published, than depending on the circumstances it may create enough notability for Varoga to have an article on him, but creating the article in Wikipedia is not a legitimate way to do an end-run around the process of creating a newspaper article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:05, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and I would've explored speedy and PROD as an option, this would certainly need better to be acceptable and I'm simply not seeing the signs of solid independent notability. SwisterTwister talk 21:44, 18 May 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.