Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Caccioppoli Jr.

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:50, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Caccioppoli Jr. (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)

Was PROD, but tag was removed without explanation. Non-notable candidate for office. Contains no sources. Fails WP:POLITICIAN since he never held office. Rusf10 (talk) 15:12, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 15:45, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 15:46, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 15:46, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 15:46, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 15:47, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - no significant in-depth coverage. Neutrality^talk 16:22, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete  Uncited article.  As a BLP, uncited material must be deleted, which is all of the material in the article.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:44, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete Wikipedia is not free advertisement for every candidate to put up their campaign brouchers.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:57, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. It's one thing to make an article, but it's another to leave it unsourced. I don't agree with that.―Matthew J. Long -Talk-^☖ 06:27, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete If he does win something eventually, it's a TOOSOON at minimum. For now, it's a failure of GNG, NPOL, etc. South Nashua (talk) 14:50, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Come on, it's a BLP with no sources at all. Bishonen | talk 02:11, 30 December 2017 (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.