Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Radford
Being president of a small political party, which holds no seats in any body higher than local authority councils, is not an automatic  pass in and of itself. He could still qualify for an article on that basis if it were based on enough |reliable source coverage ''about'' him to get him over , but the position does not create an automatic inclusion freebie that ''exempts'' him from having to be properly sourced. But what we have for sourcing here isn't cutting it at all — fully half of the sources are raw tables of election results which do not assist notability at all; one of the remaining five (''Digital Journal'') is a |user-generated "amateur journalism" site to which ''anybody'' can submit "news" about ''anything'' they choose; and even the four that are properly reliable sources are split between glancing namechecks of his existence in coverage that isn't ''about'' him, and coverage in purely local-council contexts that doesn't constitute strong evidence of England-wide notability at all. No substantive coverage about him in the role of ''political party leader'' is being shown at all. All of which means that the depth and breadth of sourcing required to make a person at this level of public prominence notable enough for a  is simply not in evidence
— User:Bearcat, 15:36, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NPOL||WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:USERG||WP:BLP (Wikipedia:Notability)