Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John MacLean (Ontario politician)

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. Courcelles (talk) 00:43, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

John MacLean (Ontario politician)[edit]

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

Minimally sourced article, which still has to be treated as a WP:BLP in the absence of any properly sourced evidence to the contrary, of a person notable only as a non-winning candidate in a political party's leadership race and as a non-winning candidate in a general election — but neither of these is a claim of notability that satisfies WP:NPOL. To be fair, when this article was first created in 2005 we did often permit articles about non-winning leadership candidates, but consensus changed — that fact no longer gets a person into Wikipedia by itself, unless they already pass NPOL or another Wikipedia inclusion guideline for some other reason. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 21:20, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:54, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:54, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unsuccessful candidate, fails WP:NPOL, had his ten minutes of fame back in 1967 but no discernable impact, no sources, fails GNG Kraxler (talk) 00:22, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - sounds very WP:ONEEVENT to me. Bearian (talk) 01:13, 4 September 2015 (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.