Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marc Livingstone

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 JForget 22:49, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marc Livingstone

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

Contested prod, it is well-established that defeated candidates are not notable. PatGallacher (talk) 10:45, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no evidence of notability is presented. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 10:53, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. —Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 10:53, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete. Ugh. Shamelessly self-promotional soapbox. Only thing that comes vaguely near to a notability claim is being a runner-up in a not-really-that-high-profile poetry competition. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 15:50, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete if you like, but be advised that the candidate did not create this page himself, and therefore rejects any accusation of "self-promotion" (shameless or otherwise). The election is over now so the page has served its purpose. I can't help but feel there is an anti-communist aspect to this, however. The BNP candidate has a page, because he was on TV once; does that make him notable? Is TV a more legitimate form of culture than a poetry competition? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.184.201 (talk) 19:08, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have now queried the notability of this person, this will now be considered on its merits. PatGallacher (talk) 21:42, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:41, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:42, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:42, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:42, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article.Tracy Hutcheon 15:42, 13 May 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.209.6.40 (talk)

Which of the sources do you consider to cover Marc Livingstone significantly and reliably independently of the subject? All I can see are election data, campaign material from his party (hardly an independent source), and articles about other organisations which mention Marc Livingstone either trivially or not at all. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 17:17, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable as a politician and a poet. As a candidate he got less than 1% of the vote. As a poet he does not seem to have garnered independent recognition. --MelanieN (talk) 22:46, 14 May 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.