Deletion of John Xuna

Comment: per .  Even if he ran for office, that is |run of the mill and fails thus fails ; the only exception has not been proven by | significant coverage in |multiple reliable secondary sources.  The article claims he's the only such and such person to have such office -- as if running for office and getting on the ballot are the same as holding public office.  For a state of its size, Florida has http://election.dos.state.fl.us/candidate/Qualifying-info.shtml quite minimal requirements for signature on petitions.  I'm something of an academic expert on energy law, and to be blunt, I've never heard of this person nor of his work on peak oil.  Regardless of whether the subject created it, his |advocacy actually harms the legitimacy of the article.  Its existence continues to hurt Wikipedia's reputation as something any fool can edit.  I agree with {{U|Bearcat}}, no relation
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT||WP:MILL||WP:POLITICIAN||WP:SIGCOV||WP:RS||WP:SOAP)

Comment: fails . {{Ping|John Xuna}}, sorry for any condescending tone in the {{u|MelanieN|nominator}}'s rationale but kindly wait until you becomes notable and someone with no  who knows how to write an encyclopedic article will write about you here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:POLITICIAN||WP:COI)

Comment: Fails  and , also it's so |promotional that it's an 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:POLITICIAN||WP:PROMO||WP:ADVMASQ)