Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shawn Kumagai

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:58, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shawn Kumagai[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

WP:BLP of a political figure, not properly sourced as having a strong claim to passing WP:NPOL. The attempted notability claims here are that he's a city councillor in a midsized community and an as yet non-winning candidate in a future election to higher office, but neither of those are automatic inclusion freebies -- city councillors are presumed notable only in internationally prominent global cities on the order of Los Angeles, New York City, Toronto or London, candidates are accepted as notable only if they already had preexisting notability for other reasons, and the only slim chance either a city councillor or a candidate has otherwise is to show such a deeply unexpected volume and depth of nationalizing coverage that they have a credible claim to being a special case of much greater national prominence than the norm.
But that's not what this article is showing: with 29 footnotes it looks well-sourced on the surface, but it's actually just reference bombing him with a mixture of primary sources, glancing namechecks of his existence in sources that aren't about him in any non-trivial way, reduplicated repetition of the same citation two or three times instead of using the proper name-and-callback format, and the purely run of the mill local coverage that any person in either of these roles would merely be expected to have in their local media, not evincing any proof that he could be seen as more notable than other city council colleagues or other candidates on the same state legislature ballot.
Obviously this is without prejudice against recreation in November if he wins the state legislature seat, but nothing here is sufficient grounds for him to already have a Wikipedia article today. Bearcat (talk) 14:45, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and California. Bearcat (talk) 14:45, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I could not find many sources which were not already cited, and these sources are insufficient to prove notability as the nominator suggests. No significant coverage appears forthcoming. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:35, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: so we can pull it back if he wins. Otherwise, not notable at the moment (fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL). Curbon7 (talk) 08:29, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:50, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more support for draftifying or should this article just be deleted?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete refbombs, wow. non-notable.Oaktree b (talk) 23:50, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a local politician, fails WP:NPOL. Deathlibrarian (talk) 05:54, 26 August 2022 (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.