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. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 05:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Paul C. Maxwell (politician) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Non-notable political candidate. Polled third (of three candidates) in the primary [1]. Fails WP:POLITICIAN as not elected to any office. Tassedethe ( talk) 21:46, 18 September 2016 (UTC) reply

• Speedy Delete. Article clearly promotional, probably qualifies for G11. Article written by SPA with likely COI. The subject fails WP:politician and this article is an attempt to promote his current campaign. MB 01:42, 19 September 2016 (UTC) reply
• Delete He is running for a state house district, if elected he will be notable, but not until then. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 03:03, 19 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 06:07, 23 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 06:07, 23 September 2016 (UTC) reply

• Delete. A person does not get a Wikipedia article just for being a candidate in an election, and even less for being a candidate in a primary — if you cannot make a credible and properly sourced case that he was already notable enough for a Wikipedia article for some other reason independent of his candidacy, then he has to actually win the seat in November (and not just the primary) to qualify for an article on the basis of the election itself. But there's no credible notability claim here, the article is written very much like a campaign brochure, and it's minimally sourced and even what little sourcing has been shown is mostly to his own self-published campaign website. Bearcat ( talk) 15:55, 23 September 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.