Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl Sheeler

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) 17:16, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Sheeler

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

unsuccessful political candidate--no other notability DGG ( talk ) 09:59, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 14:38, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 14:38, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 14:38, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rhode Island-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 14:38, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable for stand alone article; trivial failed political candidate. Kierzek (talk) 17:35, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete people who loose in the primary for US senate are almost never notable for that alone.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:17, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Running insuccessfully for office does not, of itself, make you notable (WP:POLITICIAN) No evidence of having done anything else to be considered notable. (WP:GNG) Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:59, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails both WP:SOLDIER and WP:POLITICIAN.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 17:33, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for being losing candidates in election primaries — to gain notability from an election in and of itself, a person has to win it and thereby hold office, not just run and lose. But this makes and sources no credible claim that he had any preexisting notability for other reasons, which is normally the only other way a political candidate can get in the door without winning the general election first, nor does it cite nearly enough sources to demonstrate that his candidacy was somehow a special case on the order of Christine O'Donnell's. Bearcat (talk) 18:24, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails NPOL.Icewhiz (talk) 14:12, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:N, WP:GNG, WP:SOLDIER and WP:POLITICIAN-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:13, 30 January 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.