Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Legard

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. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:29, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Legard

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

Unreferenced, non-notable per WP:POLITICIAN: being a prospective Parliamentary candidate does not automatically confer notability. Promotional tone per WP:PROMO; evident WP:Conflict of interest by creator. Proposed deletion contested by creator. MuffledThud (talk) 22:16, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. —MuffledThud (talk) 22:17, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. —MuffledThud (talk) 22:18, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The gnews hits show a range of incidental coverage, but not the significant coverage that would be required to pass WP:GNG in the face of such an obvious failure to pass WP:POLITICIAN. Aside from the notability guidelines, it would take a mammoth swing for Legard to win Darlington, so if this article is kept its likely, at least for a few years, to be for a forgotten political candidate only. --Mkativerata (talk) 22:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Darlington is actually a Con/Lab swing seat (or at least it was pre-Blair), but that doesn't matter. Very little coverage, clear WP:POLITICIAN. At the most, redirect to the constituency page and include an external link to his official site. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 22:42, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect. No RS or V. Does not meet BIO or POLITICIAN. NN. Kittybrewster ☎ 22:50, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability; being a PPC and a local councillor is insufficient. Warofdreams talk 00:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:04, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep lots of references, although these are not yet inline. Notable as well. (Bgeelhoed (talk) 15:21, 26 January 2010 (UTC)).[reply]

The references are all either self-published, or quotes in a local newspaper. Warofdreams talk 15:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This may be true, but even if it is: Wikipedia does not forbid to refer to self-published work. Also referring to local newspapers is not forbidden. So notability is not affected. (Bgeelhoed (talk) 23:12, 26 January 2010 (UTC)).[reply]

Wikipedia does forbid refer [sic] to self-published work, please read WP:SPS. ╟─Treasury Tag►Lord Speaker─╢ 17:15, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:NOTABILITY. Self-published work and sources which do not address the subject directly in detail are specifically mentioned as examples of sources which do not contribute towards a demonstration of notability. Warofdreams talk 00:13, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete quite clearly fails WP:POLITICIAN notability. JBsupreme (talk) 18:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete clearly non-notable. He doesn't appear to be notable from his job or his old political position. And, of course, it takes quite a bit to be notable for your candidacy. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 22:11, 29 January 2010 (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.