Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Shriver

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Shriver

State senate candidate with no real claim in article of meeting WP:BIO. Sources in article are not independent; gsearch and gnews not turning up reliable, independent sources outside of his local area. Speedy request was turned down with the comment that the article asserts sufficient notability, so I think this needs more discussion than a prod affords. Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:19, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:20, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Google returns 2,580 results--Puttyschool (talk) 05:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have to scroll to the end to really see how many results (google-flaw), and it's only 177. A random sample of pages are largely blogs and passing mentions. If you can find an independent, reliable source in there that shows notability, I encourage you to add it to the article because I sure couldn't find them.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - political candidate with no other notability. Also, the article reads like a campaign ad. -- Whpq (talk) 14:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - If an editor could demostrate notability for his term as county commissioner (aside from the campaign puffery in the article now) then at least there would be the potential for a keep. But with no sourcing to demonstrate notability per WP:BIO, its got to be a delete. Montco (talk) 05:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. RS attention comes from running for office. Just barely escapes G11/G12. The article is a campaign ad. What isn't straight copyvio from his website[1] is close paraphrasing. • Gene93k (talk) 09:41, 20 August 2008 (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.