Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allen Simpson

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 02:11, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Allen Simpson

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

unremarkable politician, has not been elected to any post. References are either routine coverage od confirm that he has had a number of articles published in various papers, which does not establish notability. TheLongTone (talk) 10:34, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:30, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:30, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:30, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, merely being a candidate in an election is not enough of a claim of notability to justify a Wikipedia article per WP:POLITICIAN — and I really wish that the PR teams who keep rushing these things would learn that. Rather, under normal circumstances if you cannot adequately demonstrate that he was already notable enough for a Wikipedia article before he became a candidate, then he does not become notable enough for a Wikipedia article until he wins the election. Delete; no prejudice against recreation if he wins in 2015. Bearcat (talk) 21:49, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Just another political WP:COATRACK article about an unelected candidate for public office. Beyond which I share Bearcat's frustration with the endless barrage of these sorts of thinly disguised political advertisements. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:14, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per our usual outcomes in such cases. This is almost a policy, it is so well-settled: potential candidates do not get their own articles! Bearian (talk) 20:38, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As best I can tell he is not even yet a candidate, and he would have to actually win to be notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:19, 5 June 2014 (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.