Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Plummer
Regardless'' of what party they're standing for, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for being ''candidates'' in elections — if you cannot demonstrate and |properly source that he was ''already'' eligible for an article for some other reason ''independent'' of his candidacy itself, then he has to ''win'' the election, not just run in it, to get an article out of it. And serving on a local borough council is ''not'', in and of itself, grounds for a Wikipedia article either — ''municipal'' councillors are presumed notable ''only'' in major metropolitan global city|global cities on the order of London, ''not'' in every city, town or village that exists. And ''every'' candidate in ''every'' election would ''always'' clear GNG if four or five pieces of ''local'' campaign coverage was all you had to show to get them over the bar — coverage of a non-winning candidate for election to Parliament has to ''nationalize'' before it builds a case for GNG.And for added bonus, even the media sources ''here'' largely aren't ''about'' Plummer; three of the five just namecheck his existence in coverage of something ''else''; one of the remaining two is a letter to the editor, not news content written by the newspaper's ''staff''; and the last is a purely  candidate sketch plainly submitted by his own campaign. ''None'' of this constitutes enough ''substantive'' coverage ''about'' him to mount a valid "passes GNG" claim. And, by the way, I'm ''Canadian'', and about the ''only'' difference between the UK's election system and ours is the whole "UK runs all the ballot boxes to a single central count location while Canada counts them onsite at the original polling station" thing, which has no bearing on candidate notability at all — so GGLD can spare me the "you don't understand why the UK is different" angle.GGLD, further, is getting dangerously close to |disruption with their continual unfounded allegations that this has anything to do with ideological bias — and, frankly, given that (a) this is the ''only'' topic GGLD has ever worked on, and (b) the "LD" part of their username happens to imply a direct personal connection to the very LibDem party that Plummer is a candidate for, my |conflict of interest radar is beeping rather loudly here
— User:Bearcat, 13:44, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:ROUTINE||WP:DISRUPT||WP:COI (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)