Deletion of Tom Palzewicz

Comment: Fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:POLITICIAN)

Comment: as the article does not satisfy , non-notable candidate
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL)

Comment: As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates in elections they haven't won yet — he has to ''win'' the election, not just run in it, to be deemed as passing , and other than that the only other paths for a candidate to get into Wikipedia are (a) to show and properly source that he was ''already'' notable enough for an article for some other reason ''before'' becoming a candidate, or (b) to show and properly source that his candidacy is so much ''more'' notable than most other people's candidacies that he can credibly claim his candidacy to be a ''special case''. (The textbook example here is Christine O'Donnell, who exploded to such a wild volume of nationalized and internationalized coverage that her article is actually at least twice as long as, and cites three times as many distinct sources as, the article about the actual senator she lost to.) The existence of a bit of local coverage in the candidate's own district's own local media is ''not'' enough to deem a candidate notable, because no candidate in any election anywhere ever ''fails'' to have that. So no prejudice against recreation on or after election day in November if he wins the seat, but nothing stated or sourced here qualifies him to already have an article today
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPOL)