- 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 keep. ( non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis ( talk) 00:05, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
- Robert Gray (American 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)
WP:BLP 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 satisfies WP:NPOL — if you cannot make a credible and properly sourced claim 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, without prejudice against recreation in November if he wins. Bearcat ( talk) 08:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
- Keep - Someone could very well be virtually unknown for anything except as being a political candidate and still be notable, ask Vermin Supreme, Deez Nuts, and Gloria La Riva among many others. Anyways, candidate Gray seems to have gotten reliable source coverage even if his article right now needs work (covered by the likes of NPR and the Mississippi Business Journal among others). CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 09:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
- All of those were candidates for President of the United States, and thus inhabit a completely different universe of sourceability than an unelected candidate for a state-level office — and both Vermin Supreme and La Riva do contain some evidence of notability for something besides their candidacy itself. Deez Nuts not so much, I admit — I still maintain that people in that AFD confused temporary newsiness with enduring notability. But candidates don't automatically get a notability freebie just for being candidates — they don't get WP:GNG unless the coverage nationalizes in a sustained and substantive way. Bearcat ( talk) 17:26, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 15:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mississippi-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 15:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
- Keep - Wikipedia policy seems to be that losing major-party gubernatorial candidates (I guess I'm technically jumping the gun declaring him the loser) are notable enough to be included. You see that across many states, and in Mississippi, every single losing candidate who got a major party nomination for governor is included, even ones that never held another high office: Johnny DuPree, John Arthur Eaves, Dick Molpus, Jack Reed, Leon Bramlett, Gil Carmichael, Rubel Phillips. Jhn31 ( talk) 19:35, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:POLOUTCOMES. If this were a congressional or local office, I'd go for deletion, but this is a candidate for Governor on one of the two major party lines. He has only a small chance of winning, but who knows? Bearian ( talk) 15:50, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
- 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.