Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adem Bunkeddeko

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:20, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adem Bunkeddeko (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Non-notable political candidate. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:46, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:46, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:46, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - The article doesn't mention that he's running again... Caro7200 (talk) 17:44, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: I have re-written the article with new secondary references. I think the notability issue is now adequately addressed. Fsmatovu (talk) 10:30, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a non-notable unelected candidate. Unless you win an election you need way more coverage than this to justify an article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:06, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. People do not get articles just for running as candidates in future political party primaries — the notability test at WP:NPOL is holding a notable office, not just standing as a candidate for one. But candidates are also not handed a GNG-based exemption from having to pass NPOL just because some campaign coverage exists in their local media — every candidate in every district can always show some campaign coverage in their local media, so if that were how it worked then every candidate in every district could always exempt themselves from NPOL, and NPOL itself would become meaningless. So to make a candidate notable enough for a Wikipedia article in advance of winning the election, you actually have to show one of two things: either (a) he was already notable enough for other reasons independent of the candidacy that he would already have qualified for an article on those other grounds anyway (i.e. Cynthia Nixon), or (b) his candidacy can be credibly claimed to have much greater national significance than most other people's candidacies, by virtue of having received an unusually large volume of coverage beyond just his local media market (i.e. Christine O'Donnell). But neither of those things are in evidence here.
  It's not Wikipedia's mandate or role to maintain an article about every single person whose name happens to be present in their local news right now — our job is to look past the current news cycle, and keep articles only about people who have accomplished something significant enough that it passes the ten year test for enduring significance. So obviously, no prejudice against recreation in November if he wins the seat, since his notability claim will have changed from "candidate" to "officeholder" — but nothing here, either in the substance or the sourcing, constitutes a valid reason for an article about him to already exist today. Bearcat (talk) 17:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Subject lost in a 2018 Democratic party primary for New York's 9th congressional district. While the subject did come close to defeating the incumbent in 2018, unelected candidates (especially from a primary) do not meet WP:NPOL. Bearcat says it well. --Enos733 (talk) 20:50, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. If he manages to win the primary and general elections, then he can get an article. Unelected candidates do not meet WP:NPOL. LefcentrerightTalk (plz ping) 20:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Clearly does not meet WP:NPOL as a primary challanger who lost and has held no other office.
• redirect to 2020 United States House of Representatives elections in New York, don't delete. Kingofthedead (talk) 22:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The problem for this redirect target is that there are two equally valid redirect targets, the 2020 target and the 2018 target. I think our usual outcome is a preference for deleting the page without a redirect when the subject is a non-winning candidate in multiple elections (unless they reach notability for being a perennial candidate). --Enos733 (talk) 15:53, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Enos733: I think the precedent for that is redirecting to their first race, actually. Kingofthedead (talk) 06:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, it is normal for candidates for congress to receive some coverage in their local media, and of course this articles should be deleted. It is most definitely not normal for a candidate to receive coverage in the Ugandan media.[1] This clearly shows that he has been the subject of a special amount of media attention. Since he has been the candidate in two elections now, that means BLP1E is taken care of. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:10, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Devonian Wombat, it's not abnormal for someone of Ugandan descent to get coverage in Ugandan media. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:12, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When the deletion arguments are based around the idea that he has only received coverage in local media, coverage in Ugandan media clearly disproves that. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:15, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My deletion argument is there isn't enough coverage, even when including one Ugandan piece, to meet GNG. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:02, 15 May 2020 (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.