Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Barker (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 Australian federal election campaign, 2010#Disendorsed and resigning candidates. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:45, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

David Barker (politician)

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

Contested prod, uncited BLP Fails WP:Politician Weaponbb7 (talk) 15:44, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:15, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notable only for a controversial event. It's a classic WP:BLP1E and he fails WP:POLITICIAN - selected and then deselected as a candidate for a seat that his party had no chance of winning. --Mkativerata (talk) 16:24, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Clear case of WP:BLP1E. Frickeg (talk) 21:50, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(reluctant) Redirect to Australian federal election campaign, 2010#The Opposition dumps a candidate - Typically I avoid "per above" arguments, but here there isn't any more to it: this is a clear case of a person receiving coverage for only one event who does not meet the relevant specific notability guideline. I'm !voteing redirect because Barker receives coverage in Australian federal election campaign, 2010, and that is where readers should be directed if they type "David Barker (politician)" into the search bar. My reluctance comes from the fact that the target article deals with this subject as a news report rather than an encyclopaedic topic, but at the end of the day, the quality of the target article is not a reason against a redirect. -- Lear's Fool 01:40, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:BLP1E Nick-D (talk) 11:34, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I guess that it probably is right to delete his page- I only made it because I found it in connection with the Chaser. It is probably doubtful that he will affect the election campaign. I won't touch it again. Definitely delete. (Die Snack 2.0 (talk) 09:37, 4 August 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Merge/Redirect it to Australian federal election campaign, 2010#Disendorsed and Resigning candidates. Plausible as a search term. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:01, 8 August 2010 (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.