Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Troy Stanley

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. Vanamonde (talk) 15:19, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Troy Stanley

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Failed candidate for Congress whose non politics career isn't notable. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 19:06, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 19:07, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 19:07, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete that this article has lasted for 9 years is a travesty.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:47, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect this not-elected candidate to United States House of Representatives elections in Florida, 2010#District 4, where there is already a sourced mention.E.M.Gregory (talk) 09:51, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, with no objection to the creation of a redirect afterward (but delete this first, because we don't want to hold on to its edit history.) Non-winning candidates for Congress do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates — he would have to win the election and thereby hold the office, not just run and lose, to pass WP:NPOL as a politician, and absent that he has to be able to demonstrate that he already had preexisting notability for other reasons that would have gotten him a Wikipedia article anyway. But the quality of sourcing here is not suggesting that he's got a plausible claim to passing our notability standards for businesspeople as a hot dog stand operator, either. Bearcat (talk) 16:06, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with Bearcat and E.M. Gregory, but prefer the delete then redirect approach. SportingFlyer talk 01:58, 4 September 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.