337:. This guy is getting a lot of negative attention at the moment, and I know that inclines people to delete sometimes, but he is still the candidate of a leading party for Tennessee's Senate seat. He's certainly unlikely to win, but that's true of much less fringe-y candidates in certain constituencies. I urge that we consider Clayton's notability under GNG, BIO, and POLITICIAN, without letting the tenor of the coverage bias us. We may yet decide that the coverage is flash-in-the-pan. I'm not voting at present. –
364:: "Unelected candidates for a national legislature or other national office are not viewed as having inherent notability and are often deleted or merged into long lists of campaign hopefuls, such as New Democratic Party candidates, 2004 Canadian federal election, or into articles detailing the specific race in question, such as United States Senate election in Nevada, 2010." I suspect that quite a bit of content about Clayton and his campaign and positions could end up being used in that article. --
52:
to delete this material. There is substantial and well-argued support for a merge, and indeed there is very nearly a consensus for it, but I don't think we're quite there. Discussion about the possible merge can continue on the article's talk page until consensus about it is reached. What this AfD
644:
Obviously notable. He won the primary election, the Dem party disavows, etc. Plenty of coverage of him and the election. The argument that the elected nominee for U.S. senate from a major party isn't notable seems absurd. How does deleting this article improve the encyclopedia or serve its readers
218:
situation, not something that merits a full-scale encyclopedia biography. For background, it took only 25 petition signatures to get on the primary ballot in
Tennessee; the party did not have any approval over the candidates who filed; and the state has an open primary in which voting was heavy on
661:
I have expanded and updated the article from the ample coverage this individual has recieved in reliable independent sources (the core basis for establishing notability). As he received tens of thousand of votes in a previous (2008) Senate primary candidacy, and given the extent of the ongoing
685:. I was torn on this one, because he really did get a flurry of nationwide attention when he (accidentally?) won the Democratic primary. Other than that, however, he has not been notable, so redirecting to the relevant election per usual practice is the way to go. --
359:
My view on this is not because of any concern about negative (or positive) coverage; it's because the usual practice here has been cover unelected candidates, if they are otherwise non-notable, in the article about the particular election. See
219:
the
Republican side this year. This guy won the primary by accident; he will lose by a landslide in November, and no good purpose is served by discussing his biography and political views in an article. Article topic can be merged into
179:
462:, AND a major-party-nominee for U. S. Senate. There's not a doubt that a simple article on the boring McMillan would survive on notability grounds, but who cares to create it if you have to
430:
which rightly guards against hundreds of new articles each year for long-short candidates of very temporary notability. But I'd like to see a little common-sense injected there, per 2010
602:
There is vanishingly little chance of this guy winning, although some right-wing
Republicans have suggested that they may vote for him because he's more conservative than Bob Corker. --
173:
262:
134:
624:
411:
313:
292:
240:
419:
438:(yeah, McMillan is listed there in that section). The lots of easy headlines about the largely-laughable Greene candidacy = article, while McMillan is a decorated
107:
102:
580:- This could be a delete vote for me; however, depending on the results of the election this article could be kept. As such, I would recommend merging it to
111:
139:
627:) is the right solution. I failed to find that article when I was starting this AfD -- possibly because it wasn't linked in the article about Clayton. --
94:
482:
is well-intentioned, but its seeming threshold blocks too many articles on actually-notable candidates who merely lack cheerleading editors with the
523:. Full disclosure: My opinion is that the two major party nominees for general election to president, state governor, and United States senator
194:
662:
coverage and controversies related to his candidacy (including a
Federal lawsuit alleging fraud) claims of BLP-1E are rather preposterous.
435:
161:
532:
70:
391:
346:
155:
17:
98:
694:
671:
654:
636:
611:
593:
570:
507:
401:
395:
373:
350:
329:
304:
276:
254:
232:
151:
74:
589:
455:
667:
650:
566:
503:
201:
220:
211:
713:
90:
82:
40:
581:
585:
459:
167:
663:
646:
709:
479:
427:
361:
316:
per WP:POLITICIAN. Not sure about the redirect, but an entry for him will need to be maintained at the
36:
682:
66:
545:
the policy right now, but it's probably the only way a nobody like this Mark
Clayton could survive
536:
475:
387:
369:
342:
325:
187:
690:
300:
215:
272:
250:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
708:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
632:
607:
471:
228:
551:
488:
58:
383:
365:
338:
321:
54:
686:
546:
443:
296:
431:
317:
268:
246:
483:
128:
628:
603:
378:
Yup yup. My comment was partly pre-emptive. Not saying he's notable - just that
224:
557:
494:
645:
who want to know more about this major party candidate for the U.S. Senate?
439:
53:
has found is that this article title should not become a redlink.
535:). That major party "assumed notable" proposal (which I nicknamed
702:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
451:
380:
if you would think he was notable if the coverage was positive
400:
I already created (but hid for now) the proper link at '
404:
124:
120:
116:
186:
214:by winning the state Democratic primary. This is a
210:Only claim to notability is having embarrassed the
410:Mark Clayton, Democratic Party candidate for the
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
716:). No further edits should be made to this page.
625:United States Senate election in Tennessee, 2012
412:United States Senate election in Tennessee, 2012
314:United States Senate election in Tennessee, 2012
293:United States Senate election in Tennessee, 2012
263:list of Politicians-related deletion discussions
533:Knowledge:Village pump (proposals)#WP:CANDIDATE
531:, and I proposed that at the Village Pump (see
241:list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions
200:
8:
261:Note: This debate has been included in the
239:Note: This debate has been included in the
260:
238:
418:I happen to love the idea of 'common
7:
623:to the article about the election (
458:board, the chairman of the federal
486:to source them from the get-go. --
24:
454:, the only non-physician on the
291:(note unlikely search term) to
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
478:brigade? Again, the spirit of
422:', and I happen to agree with
1:
402:Mark Clayton (disambiguation)
695:19:17, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
672:21:35, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
655:20:06, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
637:20:48, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
612:20:48, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
594:19:54, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
571:16:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
508:16:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
396:04:56, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
374:04:48, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
351:04:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
330:01:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
305:01:42, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
277:00:53, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
255:00:52, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
233:21:55, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
75:23:05, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
733:
582:Tennessee Senate Elections
521:Delete or adopt new policy
466:dig for enough sources to
221:Tennessee Democratic Party
212:Tennessee Democratic Party
91:Mark Clayton (politician)
83:Mark Clayton (politician)
705:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
460:Panama Canal Commission
584:for the time being. --
312:any useful content to
446:, 14-year co-host of
295:per WP:POLITICIAN.
586:MalcomMarcomb11376
442:vet, executive of
436:Robert R. McMillan
289:Merge and redirect
664:Candleabracadabra
647:Candleabracadabra
527:automatically be
474:and fend off the
279:
266:
257:
244:
73:
724:
707:
569:
565:
563:
539:) is absolutely
506:
502:
500:
267:
245:
205:
204:
190:
142:
132:
114:
65:
63:
48:The result was
34:
732:
731:
727:
726:
725:
723:
722:
721:
720:
714:deletion review
703:
561:
556:
554:
550:
529:assumed notable
498:
493:
491:
487:
147:
138:
105:
89:
86:
59:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
730:
728:
719:
718:
698:
697:
675:
674:
658:
657:
639:
617:
616:
615:
614:
597:
596:
574:
573:
559:
517:
516:
515:
514:
513:
512:
511:
510:
496:
480:WP:POLOUTCOMES
428:WP:POLOUTCOMES
416:
415:
414:
362:WP:POLOUTCOMES
354:
353:
332:
307:
281:
280:
258:
208:
207:
144:
85:
80:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
729:
717:
715:
711:
706:
700:
699:
696:
692:
688:
684:
683:WP:POLITICIAN
680:
677:
676:
673:
669:
665:
660:
659:
656:
652:
648:
643:
640:
638:
634:
630:
626:
622:
619:
618:
613:
609:
605:
601:
600:
599:
598:
595:
591:
587:
583:
579:
576:
575:
572:
568:
564:
562:
553:
548:
544:
543:
538:
534:
530:
526:
522:
519:
518:
509:
505:
501:
499:
490:
485:
481:
477:
473:
469:
465:
461:
457:
453:
449:
445:
444:Avon Products
441:
437:
433:
429:
425:
421:
417:
413:
409:
408:
406:
403:
399:
398:
397:
393:
389:
385:
381:
377:
376:
375:
371:
367:
363:
358:
357:
356:
355:
352:
348:
344:
340:
336:
333:
331:
327:
323:
319:
315:
311:
308:
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
286:
283:
282:
278:
274:
270:
264:
259:
256:
252:
248:
242:
237:
236:
235:
234:
230:
226:
222:
217:
213:
203:
199:
196:
193:
189:
185:
181:
178:
175:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
153:
150:
149:Find sources:
145:
141:
136:
130:
126:
122:
118:
113:
109:
104:
100:
96:
92:
88:
87:
84:
81:
79:
78:
76:
72:
68:
64:
62:
56:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
704:
701:
678:
641:
620:
577:
555:
547:AfD PRODding
541:
540:
537:WP:CANDIDATE
528:
524:
520:
492:
476:WP:WHACAMOLE
467:
463:
447:
432:Alvin Greene
423:
379:
334:
318:Mark Clayton
309:
288:
284:
209:
197:
191:
183:
176:
170:
164:
158:
148:
77:
60:
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
642:Strong Keep
484:wherewithal
468:immediately
464:immediately
420:WP:OUTCOMES
320:dab page.--
216:WP:ONEEVENT
174:free images
424:the spirit
61:S Marshall
710:talk page
472:WP:SIGCOV
440:Korea War
407:That is:
384:Roscelese
366:Arxiloxos
339:Roscelese
322:Arxiloxos
269:• Gene93k
247:• Gene93k
37:talk page
712:or in a
687:MelanieN
679:Redirect
470:satisfy
448:Face Off
434:vs 1988
392:contribs
347:contribs
297:Location
135:View log
39:or in a
335:Comment
180:WP refs
168:scholar
108:protect
103:history
629:Orlady
621:Merger
604:Orlady
525:should
285:Delete
225:Orlady
152:Google
112:delete
578:Merge
567:grab←
504:grab←
382:... –
310:Merge
195:JSTOR
156:books
140:Stats
129:views
121:watch
117:links
16:<
691:talk
681:per
668:talk
651:talk
633:talk
608:talk
590:talk
552:→gab
549:. --
489:→gab
388:talk
370:talk
343:talk
326:talk
301:talk
273:talk
251:talk
229:talk
188:FENS
162:news
125:logs
99:talk
95:edit
560:dot
542:not
497:dot
456:AMA
452:PBS
450:on
426:of
287:or
202:TWL
137:•
133:– (
55:NAC
693:)
670:)
653:)
635:)
610:)
592:)
558:24
495:24
394:)
390:⋅
372:)
349:)
345:⋅
328:)
303:)
275:)
265:.
253:)
243:.
231:)
223:.
182:)
127:|
123:|
119:|
115:|
110:|
106:|
101:|
97:|
689:(
666:(
649:(
631:(
606:(
588:(
405:.
386:(
368:(
341:(
324:(
299:(
271:(
249:(
227:(
206:)
198:·
192:·
184:·
177:·
171:·
165:·
159:·
154:(
146:(
143:)
131:)
93:(
71:C
69:/
67:T
57:—
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.