Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ron Greer (Wisconsin politician)

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 redirect to United States House of Representatives elections, 2002#Wisconsin. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:56, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Greer (Wisconsin politician)

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

Political candidate who hasn't attained notable office, or other indications of notability. Shadowjams (talk) 05:05, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Redirect per Dru of Id suggestion below. Sources don't support notability. --Dkriegls (talk to me!) 06:04, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The two sources presented on this page do not meet WP:Notability standards. Specifically, "Political Graveyard" and "Our Campaigns.com" both lack significant coverage, given that they are just indexes with Greer as a single entry, not given significant weight of coverage. Additionally, Our Campaigns.com appears to be user generated content, thus failing to meet Wikipedia:Reliable sources. --Dkriegls (talk to me!) 06:04, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails to meet our Notability guideline for politicians. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect- To United States House of Representatives elections, 2002#Wisconsin, where he is already appropriately included in the election results, and current high mark; no separate state article for the year, and no election results at Wisconsin's 2nd congressional district. Dru of Id (talk) 14:56, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this is one of a slew of undoubtedly well-intentioned "articles" about obscure losing political candidates who fail WP:POLITICIAN and are only covered because they got on the ballot. We have established a clear precedent that if the only reason somebody appears in the press is because they are on the ballot as the candidate of a major party, the coverage is really about the election and not the candidate, and the general WP:BIO standards of substantial coverage about the subject are to be applied. Greer, like the rest, fails these (odd duck though he is). --Orange Mike | Talk 15:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:08, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:08, 4 October 2013 (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.