Deletion of Thomas Lopez-Pierre

Comment: I'm inclined to argue that this individual fails . With that in mind, while it is true that a fair number of secondary news sources discuss the subject, I would argue that there are insufficient sources that discuss much beyond the anti-semetic comments, as well as mentioning domestic violence. This fact, in my opinion, places the article in the territory of  and/or 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:POLITICIAN||WP:BLP1E||WP:BLPCRIME)

Comment: this page is wholly negative BLP article that only has one section '''Controversy'''. The article creator has not even bothered to add the minimum information that is needed for a BLP article notably MOS:OPENPARABIO and has made no effort whatsoever to write a  article. I think what the article creator was trying to accuse
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: People do not get Wikipedia articles just for being unsuccessful city council candidates — but since local media are ''expected'' to cover city council elections as a core part of their ''job description'', ''every'' city council candidate would ''always'' be able to show some evidence of campaign-related coverage. So the existence of some campaign-related coverage is ''not'' enough in and of itself to ''exempt'' a candidate from having to clear , because ''every'' candidate would ''always'' have enough coverage to get that exemption, and thus completely deprecate NPOL from ever being relevant at all anymore, if it were. This is not enough coverage to demonstrate that his candidacy was somehow a special case over and above everybody else's candidacy
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL)

Comment: Fails  and . \\\Septrillion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL||WP:GNG)