Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Craig Huey (2nd nomination)

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|Craig Huey}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Craig_Huey_(2nd_nomination) Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Craig Huey}})

Advertorialized WP:BLP of a businessman and politician, not properly sourced as clearing our notability criteria for businesspeople or politicians. His notability claim as a politician is that he was an unsuccessful candidate in a congressional election, which is not a claim that passes WP:NPOL in and of itself -- and the sourcing for that comprises almost entirely routine local campaign coverage, much of which is deadlinked. As always, unelected candidates for office are not deemed to pass WP:GNG just because some local campaign coverage exists in their district's local media, because every candidate in every election can always show some of that: the notability test for a candidate requires evidence that his candidacy was much more special than most other people's candidacies, in some way that would satisfy the ten year test for enduring significance. But this is also not adequately demonstrating that he had preexisting notability that would have gotten him an article for other reasons besides the candidacy, as his business career is supported entirely by a giant reference bomb of primary sources rather than any real evidence that he was getting media coverage in that context before the candidacy happened. This is quite simply neither a well-written nor well-sourced article. Bearcat (talk) 02:58, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 02:58, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 02:58, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

• Delete clearly not notable as a politician, and his other activities do not rise to the level of notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:19, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
• Keep. Anybody going head to head with Janice Hahn is notable. Those who don't like all the puffery should just delete it (and provide reasons in the Edit summary). BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 05:08, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

::Candidates are not automatically more special than other candidates just because of which other person they happened to lose to. Regardless of who they did or didn't challenge, all candidates are still judged by the same standards as all other candidates — and those standards are based strictly on the depth of notability that the candidate themselves can or cannot show, not on the identity of their opponent. Janice Hahn does not have any uniquely Hahnian special ability to confer permanent encyclopedic notability on her election opponents, just because they were running against her — a person is not automatically more notable just because they were running against Janice Hahn than they would have been if they had run and lost in any other district in the country. Bearcat (talk) 14:17, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

• Delete Fails WP:NPOL as a failed candidate for Congress (and the California State Assembly). --Enos733 (talk) 16:11, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
• Delete Fails WP:NPOL as a failed candidate, would not meet WP:NAUTHOR for self-published works and the direct-marketing businesses are not enough to pass WP:NBIO either. Bkissin (talk) 18:00, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.