Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Schlafly (3rd nomination)
I'm surprised — I thought his name was reasonably well known — but I have to agree with Edison that there is still no reliable sourcing listed, even after the AfD has run this long, and that therefore he fails . To break the footnotes in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Andrew_Schlafly&oldid=225164613 the current version down in more detail: #1 gives a little biographical detail but seems self-published and unreliable (a biz website associated with Schlafly). #2 mentions him only trivially. #3 is unreliable (a tripod website) ''and'' mentions him only trivially. #4 and #5 provide opposite sides of the same story but neither is reliable and both mention him only as one of several participants in the abortion-breast cancer faux controversy rather than providing any biographic detail. #6 is Schlafly himself expressing an opinion. #7 is a bio of his mother, and notability is not inherited. #8 is a paper published by him. #9 is a bio on the web site of an organization founded by his mother. #10 is a marriage bann, certainly not evidence of notability. #11 and #12 source only the fact that he ran a losing political campaign, and  makes clear that that does not suffice for notability. #13 is his mother's organization again. #14 is not so much about him as about Conservapedia (which I agree is notable, much as I may not like that fact). #15 is about a scientific discovery that is per se unrelated to the subject, #16 is his own web site about the discovery, and #17–19 are blog posts about his stupid reaction to the discovery. If that's the best we can come up with, I don't think it's good enough
— User:David, 03:09, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:BIO||WP:POLITICIAN (Wikipedia:Notability)