Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Braun, Democratic Presidential Candidate, 2016

Harry Braun, Democratic Presidential Candidate, 2016

Harry Braun, Democratic Presidential Candidate, 2016 (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)

Note to AfD closer: most bangvotes here are related specifically to the article about the BLP's 2016 presidential campaign, which was redirected midway through to the BLP article Harry Braun.

I'm bringing this to AfD for discussion. I regard it as promotional, and feel that it fails WP:POLITICIAN, but I also feel that consensus is needed. I would point out that as a UK resident Brit, I am neither pro nor anti Mr Braun and his candidature. Peridon (talk) 09:30, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

• Delete - the vast majority of the sources have nothing to do with Braun. "neither the Democratic party officials Iowa or New Hampshire or the major newspapers or television news networks would acknowledge Braun’s campaign" says a lot. shoy (reactions) 13:54, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

As does, "Braun’s formal presidential announcement to the American public and the national news media is expected to occur during the month of August 2015 . . . after his Wikipedia and Facebook postings are completed." (emphasis mine) ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:22, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

• Delete The article as written is pure advertising. The vast majority of sources cited in the article have nothing to do with Mr. Braun at all and are merely being used to support his positions (i.e. Braun warned about a doomsday scenario back in 1984 and it's coming true, because bees and fish are disappearing.[Citations showing that bees and fish are disappearing.]). The article is written to support his current presidential run, but those few sources that do discuss Mr. Braun and his ideas are mostly from the 80s, with a couple from 2011 and 2012. A search for news about his current presidential run gives one result; "Bernie Sanders continues to gain on Hillary Clinton in 2016 race to White House". Examiner. July 16, 2015. {{cite news}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help) which says about Braun,

  But Sanders and Clinton are not the only Democrats seeking the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in 2016. A total of 17 other candidates have officially declared including . . . Harry Braun . . .

  A web search, as opposed to a news search, turns up a lot of results, but most of them are on his own website (pheonixprojectfoundation.us). He might be notable for something he did in the past; based on some of the cited sources from the 1980s, but as a current presidential candidate he doesn't seem notable, the past notability is sketchy at best, and this article is not written in such a way that it is salvagable. Even if he is notable a better idea is for an editor who doesn't have a conflict of interest to blow it up and start over. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:47, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
• Delete He and his candidacy are not notable. A search of Google News finds nothing recent at all. This article is frankly promotional; he admitted as much at Peridon's talk page, saying that nowadays he is "solely focused on my scientific research and my presidential campaign, that will go nowhere if I cannot get a page on Wikipedia, which is necessary for being listed as a presidential candidate on Facebook." This article is just a means to an end for him. When I saw that I left an (admittedly a little harsh) warning on his talk page, about using Wikipedia to promote himself. --MelanieN (talk) 18:00, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

P.S. Noticing that he talks about "my research," I decided to check Google Scholar to see if he has a presence there. It is minimal [1] [2] so he does not meet WP:ACADEMIC either. --MelanieN (talk) 18:05, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

• Comment There is an ongoing discussion on my talk page with the author of the article, as Melanie says. I would prefer it to be here, but you can't win them all. If there is evidence of notability in the 80s, that is still valid. It doesn't evaporate like popular fame. One point that escapes me - is he a candidate for the presidency or for the Democratic nomination? American politics puzzle me. Peridon (talk) 18:24, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
  • @Peridon: The answer to your question is: both. He is seeking the Democratic nomination for the presidency.--JayJasper (talk) 21:37, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
    • ...and to get that Democratic nomination, he needs to enter separate Democratic primary contests in each of the 50 states, or as many states as he can manage. --MelanieN (talk) 21:51, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks to both. It makes the troubles of our Labour party trying to elect a new party leader look simple by comparison. And possibly explains why only people with money can make it through... (Or so it appears - I may be wrong.) Peridon (talk) 17:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

• Strong Delete Not only is this man completely non-notable, he has received virtually no external references, with a completely biased autobiographical article. Westroopnerd (talk) 19:03, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
• Strong Delete No evidence of notability per WP:BIO, WP:POLITICIAN or WP:ACADEMIC. Agree w/ nom. & others, clearly promotional and runs afoul of WP:COI. Per ONUnicorn, even if enough reliable secondary sources can be scrounged up to establish notability (which seems presently dubious, based on google searches), it would be best to start over from scratch by one or more disinterested editors with an understanding of Wikipedia's inclusion standards for standalone article creation and fundamental policies governing mainspace content (e.g. WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, WP:DUEWEIGHT, WP:FORMAL).--JayJasper (talk) 22:05, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
• Delete per nom SOXROX (talk) 23:56, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

• Delete: Per nomination and other comments above. Un-encyclopedic autobio of a non-notable subject.--Ddcm8991 (talk) 04:05, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
• Note to closing administrator: The article was moved to Harry Braun after the start of this discussion. --MelanieN (talk) 04:03, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
• Delete: I am not sure that Harry Braun exists at all. His windships seem to be a joke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.0.172 (talk) 12:07, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
  • If Harry Braun doesn't exist, then who wrote this article? :-) R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:19, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
    • The above comment by 92.26.0.172 is unfortunate and should not be taken seriously. We are talking about a living person here, who deserves respect. --MelanieN (talk) 15:37, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

If he's a hoax, it's a very well done one. Whether or not his ideas will work is not part of this discussion. That's for the Democratic Party and the American electors to decide. What is at stake is his notability with reference to our policies, and not to anyone's political views. If he can be proved not to exist in reliable independent sources, so be it. But prove it, don't just say it. Peridon (talk) 17:29, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

• Update The author of the article, who is also the subject of the article, has reacted to the concern about the article being used to promote his presidential campaign, by writing a new version which does not mention his presidential campaign and focuses on his scientific advocacy. The new version can be seen here: [3] Would anyone find this version to be more acceptable? --MelanieN (talk) 18:53, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
  • No, the promotional aspect was not the primary issue. With or without mentions of his presidential campaign(s), the article still consists primarily of original research and still falls far short of the standard notability threshold needed to merit a standalone article.--JayJasper (talk) 20:39, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

I think the word 'advocacy' that you used is significant. What he's written IS advocacy, which in Wikipedia terms means promotion. For me, the new version still doesn't cut the mustard. (I do like these old fashioned expressions...) Peridon (talk) 20:03, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

• Delete His scientific advocacy is not notable. His principal paper is in a minor Serbian journal, and had attracted little attention. He would be , if anything, more notable as a potential Presidential candidate, and I doubt he is recognized as one. If he should be, a brief aticle about the candidacy would be acceptable--without hte advocacy. The best thing to do with all versions of the preset article is to delete them. DGG ( talk ) 05:06, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
• Strong Keep && Improve for the Harry Braun BLP-article, but Redirect Harry Braun, Democratic Presidential Candidate, 2016 to Harry_Braun#Political_campaigns (1984/1986 in AZ CD#1 versus McCain, and 2004/2012/2016 for president). Also, create the wiki-traditional Harry Braun presidential campaign, 2004 + Harry Braun presidential campaign, 2012 + Harry Braun presidential campaign, 2016 redirects, pointing to the same location of Harry_Braun#Political_campaigns. Braun's 2012 campaign satisfies WP:NOTEWORTHY, with articles in WP:SOURCES specifically about his presidential campaign efforts. Braun's 2004 potus campaign was also covered, once by C-SPAN, and also got ~10 sentences of reasonably-detailed listicle-depth in WaPo, which again is WP:NOTEWORTHY for inclusion into the most-appropriate article, in this case Harry Braun the BLP article.

• 2004, http://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/2004/01/13/a-show-of-hands/bf185f6d-e1d3-4d02-90f1-75d47356b957/
• 2004, http://www.c-span.org/search/?searchtype=Videos&sort=Newest&personid[]=1008862

---

• 2012, http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/08/19/democrat-highlights-trigg-palin-at-soapbox/
• 2012, http://www.dailyiowan.com/2011/07/25/Metro/24295.html

Technical-glitch-note: Braun *is* running again in 2016, although I note that the FEC website (and www.TheGreenPapers.com as well)[4] mis-reports his candidacy as "Harry Braul" due to a mistake by the FEC data-entry personnel.[5] Since Braun is only officially launching his potus campaign this month (August 2015), despite filing in late May 2015, it is somewhat silly to demand immediate production of WP:RS sources to demonstrate the wiki-notability of said Braun'16 campaign, and if such cannot be produced, delete the completely-distinct BLP article. See also, WP:WITCH. Braun is wiki-noteworthy for his earlier campaigns in 2004 and 2012, which got a bit of coverage (per URLs provided above).

    The question becomes, then, does the dedicated article Harry Braun belong in mainspace, aka demonstrate plausible wiki-notability ... which I hope User:Peridon has carefully explained to Braun is very different from real-world notability? Or instead, per WP:PRESERVE, should the political-sources above be merged into an appropriate article, such as in this case Democratic_Party_presidential_candidates,_2016#Other_candidates. As it happens, I believe the case can be made that Harry Braun the BLP article satisfies wiki-notability and passes WP:42. The usual wiki-tradition is to demandeth three in-depth independent-third-party wiki-reliable sources, in three distinct years. To four, thou shalt not count; five is right out.

    Before he started running for president during the current millenium, Braun also ran for u.s. rep in Arizona CD#1 versus none other than another presidential candidate, John McCain. According to legit-looking newspaper-clippings on Braun's website,[6] there was some press-coverage of his 1984 and 1986 campaigns. Assuming they check out, these are dedicated articles about Braun specifically, and in different election-years. Wiki-notability is WP:NOTTEMPORARY. His political campaign-coverage in 2004 (e.g. by C-SPAN) and 2012 (e.g. by Des Moines Register) also counts towards demonstrating wiki-notability, of course.

• 1984, "Candidate seeks to halt 'suicide' energy policy: Urges moratorium on atomic weapons to foster research", by Joel Nilsson, The Arizona Republic, September 19, 1984
• 1984, "Braun outlines plan for energy mecca", by [unknown], Tempe Daily News, page 3, September 19, 1984
• 1984, "Candidate: Hydrogen alternative energy source", by Sanaa Al-Marayati, ASU State Press, page 5, September 24, 1984.
• 1984, "The World According to Braun", by Doug MacEachern, The New Times, page 3, September 26, 1984.
• 1984, "McCain, Braun vie for House seat", by Susan Turley, Tempe Daily News, October 14, 1984, page 1 and A4.
• 1984, "McCain vs, Braun", by Susan Turley, Tempe Daily News, October 23, 1984, page A3.

---

• 1986, "Candidate serious on energy issues", by Max Jennings (Executive Editor), The Mesa Tribune, page A7, May 7, 1986.
• 1986, "1st District candidate says solar energy only answer", by Adrianne/Adrian Flynn, Tempe Daily News, June 3, 1986.
• 1986, "District 1 Democrat finds hope in hydrogen", Adrian/Adrianne Flynn, The Mesa Tribune, Vol. 38, No. 202, page 1, August 19, 1986
• 1986, "Sunshine Man: Braun hopes solar solution stirs District 1 voters", by Don Harris, The Arizona Republic, August 22, 1986, page B1 (Valley & State).
• 1986, "Braun broadens appeal, shows promise in District 1 race", by Adrianne/Adrian Flynn, The Mesa Tribune, October 6, 1986.
• 1986, "Braun says energy is not his only issue in House campaign", by [unknown], The Arizona Republic (Special Edition), October 10, 1986.
• 1986, "1st District contest heats up after debate", by Adrianne/Adrian Flynn, The Mesa Tribune, October 20, 1986.
• 1986, "Braun levels attack on Rhodes over CAP", by [unknown], The Arizona Republic, October 24, 1986. page B1 (Valley & State).
• 1986, "Braun blasts CAP as welfare for rich", Stephen Higgins, Scottsdale Progress, October 23, 1986.

Braun the BLP was not always a political candidate; he also has some coverage-bursts related to his scientific work, see his peer-reviewed papers here,[7] and also [8][9], which per WP:SCHOLARSHIP can count as WP:RS (not mere WP:ABOUTSELF) despite having Braun listed as an author, since the publication-system of editors and journals and peer-review surrounding such works makes them more than just a science-blog, they are scientific papers. Note that not all of these papers are the *right* "H.Braun", see WP:DBTF; unfortunately for wikipedians trying to use scholar.google.com, besides Harry Braun of Arizona/Georgia, who publishes in energy/chemistry fields, there is also the completely distinct human named Hans-Werner Braun of U.Michigan, who publishes in networking/internet fields. Here are the BLP's cite-counts (according to google), that I was able to find:

• 4 cites, 1990, The Phoenix Project [version#1990]: an energy transition to renewable resources
• 2 cites, 1991, Hydrogen Storage Systems (in Hydrogen: Journal of the American Hydrogen …)

---

• 2 cites, 1997, Stirling Energy Systems (SES) dish-Stirling program (several co-authors) (ieeexplore.ieee.org)

---

• 3 cites, 1999, Status of the Boeing Dish Engine Critical Component project (four co-authors)
• 8 cites, 2000, The Phoenix Project [version#2000]: Shifting from Oil to Hydrogen , reprint-entry at books.google.com for this version#2000 == [10]

---

• 9 cites, 2003, Calculating hydrogen production costs
• 5 cites, 2003, The Phoenix Project [version#2003]: Shifting From Oil to Hydrogen with Wartime Speed
• 4 cites, 2003, The Bad News About Natural Gas

---

• 2 cites, 2008, The phoenix project [version#2008]: Shifting to a solar hydrogen economy by 2020 (Chemical Industry and Chemical Engineering Quarterly)
• 10 cites, 2008, Photobiology: The biological impact of sunlight on health & infection control

I'll note that the WP:GOOG is still imperfect: not listed at scholar.google.com that I could find, one of the BLP's scientific papers from 1992, “Solar Stirling Gensets for Large-Scale Hydrogen Production,” (in: Solar Energy Technology, ASME: American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vol 13, pp. 21-31), is still being cited today, for instance in the concentrated solar power chapter by Alan J. Sangster in the 2014 Springer textbook Electromagnetic Foundations of Solar Radiation Collection.[11] Point being, the list of peer-reviewed papers above is partial, not complete. And since this is WP:GOOG, the list is probably not correct either; I doubt all the listings are peer-reviewed, and all the cite-counts exact.

    But we can use the scholar.google.com output, rough and imperfect as it is, to give us some idea of Braun's academic street-cred: he's not a world-famous researcher by WP:NPROF standards, but he's got legit scientific publications spread out over a couple decades, and he has seen some peer-review (via the scientific journals) and some peer-recognition (via the cite-counts). Most of his papers are about energy-production, either solar-power or hydrogen-power or both, but interestingly his highest-cited paper is from 2008, yet hearkens back to his grad school days, since it is about photobiology rather than about solar power. Braun published The_Phoenix_Project:_Shifting_from_Oil_to_Hydrogen in 1990, which was revised-and-reprinted in 2000 and in 2003 and in 2008; as with his academic papers, publication and editorial-control might have made this book count toward notability, but in this case the publisher was his Braun's employer-slash-startup SPI. (The book-article, just like the campaign-article, should be merged-and-redirected into Harry Braun the BLP-article, methinks.) That said, his opus has been cited by serious people in serious places: Lester Brown for instance. Outside of academia, there is additional reasonably-in-depth-coverage of Braun's solar&hydrogen ideas, for a popular audience, considerably before he entered the 2004 presidential contest in most cases:

• 1982, "Quality of light held important to your health [by Braun -- the piece is all about him && his research]", by Kitty Maclnnis, Phoenix Gazette, November 17, 1982.

---

• 2002 (undated on evworld site but dated in this[12] blog) , http://evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=317 , conceivably WP:RS at first glance.[13]
• 2002/2003, six talk radio shows on Coast to Coast AM (cf Art Bell), http://www.coasttocoastam.com/guest/braun-harry/5738

---

• 2008, http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/environment/2008-01-20-solar-power_N.htm

His startup-businesses are relatively small in terms of revenues and employees; they are consulting vehicles for his personal skillset, from what I can tell via a quick glance, and mostly involved with renewable energy projects of one kind or another. Here is the Dun & Bradstreet for SPI aka Sustainable Partners, founded 2005.[14] There was an earlier small startup company called Mesa Wind LLC, which played some role (unspecified by any WP:RS that I could locate) in a wind-farm-development-project in New Mexico.

    Bottom line: just for the 1986 election-cycle, we have easily satisfied WP:GNG; consider spinoff article about Arizona's 1st congressional district election, 1986 of Braun versus Rhodes. But for this AfD discussion, Braun's other political campaigns have also generated WP:NOTEWORTHY-to-borderline-WP:N press coverage. His scientific papers have been cited, albeit not *widely* cited, and spread over a couple decades. He's got popular coverage of his scientific ideas, as well. Thus, strong keep of the BLP-article, since WP:RS exist from 1982 through 2012 at least. That said, merge all subsidiary articles (campaign/book/research/etc) into subsections of the BLP-article, with possible exception of congressional races getting their own dedicated articles. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 11:09, 24 August 2015 (UTC)