Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Plummer (politician) (3rd nomination)
Being a non-winning candidate for lieutenant governor is not an automatic notability freebie that exempts a person from having to be better-sourced than this — the base election coverage focuses primarily on the ''top'' of the ticket, and far, far less on the #2, so the case for deeming the lieutenant governor candidate "inherently" notable is far weaker than the case for the governor candidate. (And even then, a gubernatorial candidate still doesn't ''actually'' get an automatic inclusion freebie just for the fact of being a candidate either — he's just ''likelier'' to ''have'' enough reliable source coverage to clear , but still isn't guaranteed an article if he doesn't.) But there isn't a GNG-passing volume or quality of sourcing being shown here: of the seven footnotes, two are raw tables of the election results themselves (valid for verifying that detail if the article has already cleared GNG, but not a ''bringer'' of GNG in and of itself), and two are to an industry trade magazine, not a widely distributed general interest source — leaving us with just three sources that actually constitute media coverage, of which two are to the same small-town radio station and all three are in the context of his candidacies themselves. But every candidate in any election anywhere could ''always'' show three sources about that, so that's not in and of itself enough coverage to make his candidacy more notable than the norm. As for the Bushranger's question, if there are multiple possible redirect targets, then  says we shouldn't redirect at all — if a reader actually searches for him, all of the pages with his name in them will come up in the list of results anyway, so not having a redirect would not prevent anybody from finding the articles
— User:Bearcat, 22:06, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:XY (Wikipedia:Notability)