Deletion of Anila Ali

Comment: though could do with pruning to remove |puffery and unsourced material. Meets  as has significant coverage from ''India-West'' http://www.indiawest.com/news/global_indian/pakistani-american-anila-ali-running-for-irvine-city-council/article_a2c06ad2-0662-11e6-8c70-cb2a728a1d39.html, the ''Orange County Register'' http://www.ocregister.com/articles/muslim-649192-muslims-ali.html and the Clarion Project http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/muslims-against-islamists-interview-pakistani-activist-anila-ali
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:PEA||WP:GNG)

Comment: This is someone who is at best only locally known. More importantly, a lot of the coverage is routine local coverage in the context of an election candidate. We tend to discount these for , as otherwise every single minor political candidate will become notable. The subject did not win any post and neither is there any other significant coverage in a non-local media. Accordingly, delete
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:POLOUTCOMES)

Comment: I commented above, but had not !voted yet. Although I was leaning delete, I was open to reliable sources being brought forward in this discussion to establish notability. That has not happened, so I think the article should be deleted. We need , and what we have is a large collection of passing and trivial mentions
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: mainly on the basis of the ridiculous |COI editing and puffery. This is an advertisement, not an encyclopedia article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI)