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-- Ymblanter ( talk) 08:42, 11 January 2016 (UTC) reply

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

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

WP:BLP, written like a campaign brochure and parked on a single source, of a person notable only as an as-yet-unelected candidate in a future election. As always, this is not a claim of notability that gets a person over WP:NPOL; if you cannot make a credible and properly sourced claim that the subject was already eligible for a Wikipedia article for some other reason before becoming a candidate, then he does not become notable enough for a Wikipedia article until he wins the election. But nothing here demonstrates any preexisting notability — and it's worth noting that the article was created by a user named "Johnclieske123", suggesting a conflict of interest. Delete, without prejudice against recreation in November if he wins the seat. Bearcat ( talk) 02:30, 4 January 2016 (UTC) reply

• Delete - A review of one search engine did not show that there is significant coverage; I do not consider the subject to meet WP:NPOL or any other notability guideline. As the subject currently fails to meet notability, the article should be deleted per WP:DEL8. - ¢Spender1983 ( talk) 06:16, 4 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:19, 4 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:19, 4 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:19, 4 January 2016 (UTC) reply

• Delete. He clearly fails WP:POLITICIAN unless/until he wins an election so to me the more interesting question is whether he's notable in some other way, most likely WP:PROF. If he were, the article would need to be rewritten to focus on what he's actually notable for, but might be saved from outright deletion. However, his institution is not highly ranked (#250 in the US in political science from the searches I did), he has no major national or international awards, and his publications are not highly cited enough to convince me of a pass of WP:PROF#C1. ("Regional subcultures of the United States" has 154 citations in Google scholar but the rest are all below 100 and his h-index is only 9.) — David Eppstein ( talk) 23:43, 4 January 2016 (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.