Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Kemp

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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:52, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Kemp[edit]

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

Non-notable Wisconsin county politico. A better claim to notability than some, but he does not meet WP:BIO or or WP:ACADEMIC. Glenfarclas (talk) 00:04, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:20, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:20, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Has the sources, but is right at the edge for notability on both the political and professor sides. Royal broil 02:02, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Although there are citations, fails WP:POLITICIAN. Toddst1 (talk) 15:05, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:ACADEMIC and WP:POLITICIAN. Being a city council member, college professor, and head of a county party does not make one notable in my opinion. And having a long, well-cited article does not change that. --Baron Larf 05:01, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Did some research but unfortunately I am not seeing enough coverage in secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 14:01, 21 December 2009 (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.