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. Typically, this would redirect to the gubernatorial election article. However, that specific article has not been wikilinked in this discussion, and I'm not about to guess. Consensus is to delete, but nobody would be horrified if it was recreated as an appropriate redirect the panda ₯’ 10:28, 1 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Evan Falchuk (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Subject's business career has not received significant coverage in reliable sources. Most of the sources are about his business and not about him personally. The two sources that cover him somewhat significantly are not "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". One is a website where entrepreneurs interview other entrepreneurs and whose editor-in-chief's only journalistic credit is being a "pro blogger" at his own blog [1]. The second is a "network of popular health bloggers" who are "health commentators, not a news source" [2]. His political career is notable for only one event – the 2014 Massachusetts gubernatorial election. Hirolovesswords ( talk) 15:30, 14 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Hirolovesswords ( talk) 18:29, 14 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Hirolovesswords ( talk) 18:29, 14 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Hirolovesswords ( talk) 18:29, 14 May 2014 (UTC) reply

• Redirect It's strange that the article makes no mention of his gubernatorial campaign when the best sources I have been able to find 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 are all about his run for Governor. However, I'm not sure this coverage goes beyond routine and is enough to meet the criteria of WP:POLITICIAN and avoid, as Hirolovesswords says, WP:1E. I'd say redirect for now. Then it can be easily re-created if/when he garners enough coverage to warrant his own article. Tiller54 ( talk) 11:23, 16 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar  ♔ 12:29, 23 May 2014 (UTC) reply

• A person does not qualify for an article on Wikipedia just for being a candidate in an election (or even multiple elections) — and as notability is not inherited, he doesn't qualify for an article just for being the brother of someone who does, either. So what do we have left — he's notable for being the president and vice-chair of a company that doesn't even have an article to link to? Hmmmm, no. Delete (I'd also accept redirection to the article on the election campaign); no prejudice against recreation if (and only if) he actually wins the election. Bearcat ( talk) 02:27, 27 May 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.