Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cesar Ascarrunz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 05:43, 10 February 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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. Kurykh (talk) 03:04, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cesar Ascarrunz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)Us
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Mr. Ascarrunz does not, in my humble estimation, meet the notability requirements under WP:POLITICIAN and the current sources appear to be links to various election sites. Dolotta (talk) 01:42, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —MRD2014 (talkcontribs) 01:55, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. —MRD2014 (talkcontribs) 01:55, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above are WP:POLICIES that must be followed before an article may be nominated for deletion. Additionally, Señor Ascarrunz is more than a "politician". Ping me back. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 02:11, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
WP:POLOUTCOMES contains no indication that perennial candidates are accorded any special degree of notability above and beyond any other unelected candidate. Bearcat (talk) 01:20, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 01:16, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 22:26, 2 November 2016 (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.