Deletion of Sean Perryman

Comment: People do not get articles just for declaring themselves as candidates in future elections per se — but since ''every'' candidate in ''every'' election can ''always'' show some evidence of campaign coverage in their local area, the existence of such coverage does not automatically hand candidates a "GNG"-based ''exemption'' from having to pass NPOL, because they ''every'' candidate would ''always'' get that exemption and NPOL itself would be inherently meaningless. So for media coverage to rise to the level of exempting a candidate from NPOL, it's not enough that it exists: rather, it has to demonstrate that either (a) he already had preexisting notability for other reasons that would ''already'' have gotten him into Wikipedia ''before'' he was ever a candidate for anything, or (b) it demonstrates a credible reason why his candidacy could be considered ''much more special'' than everybody else's candidacies, in such a way that ''even if he loses the election in the end'' his candidacy itself would still pass the |ten year test for enduring significance anyway. Nothing here passes either of those tests
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:10YT)

Comment: per  and . Agree he fails , but meets GNG
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The Heymann Standard (WP:HEY||WP:GNG||WP:NPOL)

Comment: per . The article contains more than a dozen sources - including ones from universities and nonprofits - explaining why he is an expert on tech policy and specifically AI/ML bias issues. Per https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sean_Perryman&oldid=973163384|the most recent edit, the article now contains 23 separate sources. If his NAACP advocacy doesn't rise to the notability threshold, his speaking and advocacy as a part of Internet Association definitely does. Recommend keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)