Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Kanuth

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. A clear consensus. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 19:12, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

David Kanuth

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

No evidence of notability for this political candidate, but that was enough to pass the very weak requirements of A7 . DGG ( talk ) 16:35, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:12, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:13, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:13, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:13, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NPOL, no evidence of other notability to meet WP:GNG AusLondonder (talk) 22:21, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nothing at all for any applicable notability. SwisterTwister talk 22:28, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-winning candidates for office do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates — if you cannot make and properly source a credible claim that they were already eligible for an article for some other reason before becoming a candidate, then they do not become eligible for an article until they win the election. But nothing here demonstrates or sources that at all. And, in fact, he wasn't even the candidate on the general election ballot, but merely in his party's primary — which counts for even less than being a non-winning general election candidate does. Bearcat (talk) 16:27, 10 May 2016 (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.