Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Dobrian

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. no valid reqson for keeping after 14 days. DGG ( talk ) 22:21, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Dobrian

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

Unremarkable feelance writer and unsuccessful fringe mayoral candidate. Fails WP:NOTABILITY. Some COI noted on talk page. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 12:35, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The subject did add some autobiography to the article, but I removed the non-notable components. The article is now properly referenced and unbiased. As far as Libertarian Party (United States), I think that it is the only viable third party in America. The article does not overstate his case and I think that the article establishes that the subject has succeeded in making himself notable enough for WP. Please compare this AfD to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Casavis.--Standardfact (talk) 04:05, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retain: Joseph Dobrian is on the ballot by virtue of New York election law which requires submission of around 8,000 signatures on ballot acces petitions. The Libertarian Party is the third largest poltical party based on candidates and number of states with presidential candidates on the ballot. Retaining entries for Dobrian's opponents while deleting his probably violates campaign finance law and risks Wikipedia's 501c status. ImmoveableGroove (talk) 21:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC) — ImmoveableGroove (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete – Article fails WP:POLITICIAN. In addition, there are no GNEWS and no GHits of substance to support article. ttonyb (talk) 22:21, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lacks significant coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. Just being a candidate for a political office is not enough to establish notability. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 13:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 21:54, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:49, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Being a candidate for local political office is not a claim of notability and the subjects' journalistic contributions don't rise to the level of denoting notability either. Sam Blacketer (talk) 08:20, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails notability criteria. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 20:00, 16 October 2009 (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.