Jon Kiper: Probably should fall under WP:G11 section for speedy deletion, but I'm not sure.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 14:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Politicians ,  and New Hampshire .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 14:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : non-notable businessman, being a political candidate isn't enough for notability.  Sourcing used just talks about where he's worked and good deeds done in the community.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:54, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Several reliable sources about the campaign itself and his business, GNG is met here.  Royal Autumn Crest ( talk ) 20:58, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment One thing to note here, there appear to be two other candidates he's up against: Cinde Warmington and Joyce Craig .  Warmington only has one link about her gubernatorial run in her article and Craig only has two.  Clearly there are likely more out there for them, and likewise there will probably be more for him as well given that he's already gained exposure before the run (see the links.) This article is new, it should be seen as what it can become over the next few months, not as what it is now.  Royal Autumn Crest ( talk ) 14:00, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  People do not get Wikipedia articles just for standing as candidates in elections they have not won — and since every candidate in every election always receives some amount of campaign coverage, the existence of some campaign coverage is not enough to hand a candidate any sort of GNG-based exemption from having to pass NPOL.  If that were how it worked, then NPOL itself would be entirely meaningless and unenforceable, because every candidate would always get that exemption and nobody would ever be subject to NPOL at all anymore.  So the inclusion test for an unelected candidate doesn't hinge on "campaign coverage exists" — it requires that either  (a) he has sufficient coverage in other contexts besides the election campaign that he would already qualify for an article on those other grounds regardless of his success or failure in the election, or  (b) the campaign coverage evinces a credible reason why his candidacy should be seen as a special case of markedly greater notability than everybody else's candidacies, such that even if he loses his candidacy would still pass the ten year test for enduring significance anyway .  Neither of those things have been shown here, however.  Obviously no prejudice against recreation next fall if he wins, but nothing here is already enough as of now.  Bearcat ( talk ) 18:01, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect >>> 2024 New Hampshire gubernatorial election Djflem ( talk ) 08:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete non-notable candidate for office, fails GNG.  Bearcat as usual encapsulates my argument better than I can.  SportingFlyer T · C 02:21, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect