Wikipedia:articles For Deletion Suraj Patel (3rd Nomination)

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. Sandstein 20:31, 29 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Suraj Patel

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

This page was deleted in December due to WP:NPOL not being met and there being no non-political notability. That is still the case; the "new references" (likely sufficient to prevent WP:G4 deletion) are about political fundraising or various scandals, and do not make him notable. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 02:09, 22 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 05:31, 22 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 05:31, 22 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 05:31, 22 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Keep. This is a notable subject by any objective measure. HPLeu ( talk) 12:51, 22 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Delete. Being an as yet non-winning candidate in a future election does not get a person into Wikipedia in and of itself — a person has to win the election and thereby hold the seat, not just run in it, to clear WP:NPOL as a politician. And that goes double for people who, as of right now, are still only as yet non-winning candidates in party primaries — being a primary challenger to an incumbent congressperson is very definitely not a notability criterion in its own right. There is no evidence of preexisting notability here for any other reason independent of his candidacy, and no evidence that anything has happened to change the notability equation since the first discussion — as near as I can tell, HPLeu's grounds for claiming that the equation had changed was that Patel outraised Maloney in April, but that's not a notability criterion for a candidate either. He'll be eligible to have this article recreated on or after November 6 if he wins the seat, but nothing here is grounds for him to already have an article today. Bearcat ( talk) 18:21, 22 May 2018 (UTC) reply
Delete unelected candidates are not notable. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 02:46, 26 May 2018 (UTC) reply
WP:NPOL doesn't say that elected officials are notable and candidates for office are not notable. It says elected officials may not be notable and unelected candidates may be notable (so long as they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article", which this subject has.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HPLeu ( talk • contribs) 16:20, 28 May 2018 (UTC) reply

There is no candidate in any election anywhere who ever doesn't have some "coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article" — so if "some coverage exists" were all it took to distinguish a notable candidate from a non-notable one, then every candidate in every election would always be notable and Wikipedia would be nothing more than a repository of campaign brochures anymore. So the test for making a candidate notable just for being a candidate is not just "some coverage exists" — it is "so much coverage exists that there's a credible reason to believe people will still be looking for an article about him ten years from now even if he loses the race", which is not what this is showing. Bearcat ( talk) 18:01, 28 May 2018 (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.