Deletion of Andrew Hastie (politician)

Comment: It is rather tedious that it has had to come to this, since very possibly this whole affair will be rendered moot in two weeks' time. In the meantime, however, Hastie has no claim of passing GNG. He is known only and entirely for his candidacy for Canning; there is, to my knowledge, no coverage whatsoever of him in any other context, thus he fails ONEEVENT as Nick-D says. If he is successful - which he very well might be - then obviously he passes , but in the meantime he is not notable and the article is premature. We also want to discourage this kind of premature creation and actually had a kind of incubator for these a few years ago, which has fallen into abeyance. If someone wanted to host this in userspace until the by-election that would be a satisfactory solution as well - in fact, given that the article in its current state is quite decent, I would be happy to do so myself
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:POLITICIAN)

Comment: per the nominator and other delete voters, and hopefully a  close. The concerns raised by The-Pope could be fixed by moving the article into userspace or raftspace
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW||WP:D)

Comment: with the acknowledgement that this is process wonkery.  I am not keen on seeing Wikipedia used as a tool in political campaigning, as this article seems to be, and even though my money is on Hastie to scrape in, I don't think we should set any precedent that "sure things" are exempted from guidelines like  and .  Undelete if and when he wins
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:POLITICIAN||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: per Nick-D, Frickeg, Bearcat and the guidelines they linked to. No need to redirect as after election- if that would make him notable- a much better encyclopaedic summary could be written that would be less biased by 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENTISM)

Comment: It should have been speedied or redirected, Onel5969 had no business forcing this time-sensitive situation through AfD, and I would suggest a  close as soon as possible. Hastie has absolutely no claim to notability besides his political candidacy: if he wins, he will be unquestionably notable, if he loses, he is unquestionably not notable, and the by-election is far too closely contested for an article to be created in advance and only serves as campaign propaganda
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: Full disclosure, I was the editor who approved this article through the AfC process. {{u|Nick-D}} and I have had a cordial back and forth regarding this article, which he felt should be a redirect, and I disagree with. I thought that if he felt strongly that a created article shouldn't be on Wikipedia, he should bring it to the AfD process, which he has graciously done. I understand his viewpoint, but in my opinion, this is a case that regardless of the outcome of the upcoming election, this fledgling politician clearly passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: the article should see all points of view per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: Just the national television coverage alone is enough to satisfy . Perhaps if this was part of a general election collection of candidates we would not have received the national coverage of the person. But that's not the case here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)