Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luke Wilkins

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. Shimeru (talk) 21:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Wilkins

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

Blatant self-promotion for unelected candidate in upcoming election. All references refer only to this fact and his young age. This article was already deleted once, but somehow speedy delete was denied the second time. Some mention of youth work, but this hardly passes inclusion requirments. Dmol (talk) 23:35, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails WP:POLITICIAN and WP:ANYBIO. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:28, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Self promotion. Not notable yet he might deserve an article if he's elected but otherwise it's just promotional conjecture "COULD be the youngest candidate in the UK's 2010 general election, and IF he's elected he will be Britain’s youngest current Politician."Teapotgeorge^Talk 09:20, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:10, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:10, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The general rule in WP:POLITICIAN is to redirect candidates to the election page. But this guy isn't even a candidate yet so I'm not sure that serves any useful purpose. --Mkativerata (talk) 17:27, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is no evidence anywhere that this person satisifes any of the notability guidelines, whether WP:NOTE, WP:POLITICIAN or any other. In fact in my opinion the article qualifies for a speedy deletion, as the purpose of the article is unambiguously promotion. It was created by the user Luke wilkins, and I see no reason to doubt that he is indeed Luke Wilkins. Curiously enough one of Luke wilkins's edit summaries is "Made the Article less neutral". At first I thought this must mean something other than what it looked like, but having read it, and considered it in context of the editor's other edits, I now think it means exactly what it said: he had decided that it was not promotional enough and edited it to make it more so. As I said, in my opinion speedy delete, but failing that just delete. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to constituency per recent convention. NN until elected. Please bring back to AFD, if he fails to submit nomination papers to become an actual candidate rather than PPC. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:27, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What recent convention? Can you give links? JamesBWatson (talk) 12:14, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that WT:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom#Articles on Prospective Parliamentary Candidates for Election 2010 is what is being referred to. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 17:27, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to constituency as per many similar recent articles. Warofdreams talk 15:35, 15 April 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.