Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Warren (South Carolina 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. Yunshui ^雲 _水 13:19, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

John Warren (South Carolina politician)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

He has not held a political position - Fails WP:POLITICIAN. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:55, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:56, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Carolina-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 03:56, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete He got under 30% of the vote in the primary. In the unlikely chance he is elected governor, than he will be notable, not before. The article is both overly promotional and makes lots of unfounded claims to try to bolster its alleged notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:32, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to South Carolina gubernatorial election, 2018 Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. I don't know how useful the redirect would be because of the disambiguator. – Muboshgu (talk) 13:55, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do not Delete - At least until after the primary. Warren forced an inclumbent Republican governor into a runoff, which has never happened before in South Carolina. The most recent poll has him neck-and-neck with the incumbent governor. Considering that Warren gathered the support of Templeton and Bryant, there is a significant chance that McMaster could lose. Of course, not all of Templeton's and Bryant's supporters will vote for Warren, but it's a significant number. I recommend waiting until after the June 26 primary to make a deletion choice. I will vote to delete the page if Warren loses. Nicholemacgregor (talk) 23:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As JPL mentions, it is too soon to create an article on this individual. Wikipedia does not "wait" for possible notability; it must already be established otherwise we may as well throw away our notability guidelines.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 00:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:NPOL ("Just being [...] an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability"), and there isn't the significant independent coverage to meet the GNG either. As stated above, notability is about the here and now, not what could be. If the subject is elected, then the article can be recreated (and this content could be undeleted if desired). ƒirefly ( t · c · who? ) 08:16, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to South Carolina gubernatorial election, 2018, I'll likely be neutral on re-creation if he does win the primary. Insufficient coverage outside of his primary campaign, and that coverage is largely local. power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:31, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not a good redirect term because of the disambiguator. Even if he wins the primary, just being a general election candidate for governor does not confer notability outside of the one event, the election. If he wins the general election, then he will gain notability as soon as the results are declared by various media outlets on election night, and the article should be undeleted at that time. -LtNOWIS (talk) 06:08, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. People do not get Wikipedia articles just for running as candidates in election primaries, or for getting enough votes to push the incumbent into a runoff — and even if he wins the runoff in the end, he's still not guaranteed an article just for going into the general election as the "official" candidate either. The only sure shot over WP:NPOL is to win the general election and thereby hold the office — to get an article just for being a candidate, he would have to be shown to garner coverage that goes significantly beyond the routine local election coverage that's merely expected to exist for all candidates, but that's not what the sourcing here is showing. No prejudice against recreation in November if he wins the seat and becomes governor-elect, but nothing here is already grounds for a Wikipedia article today. Bearcat (talk) 18:57, 20 June 2018 (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.