- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.
The result was no consensus. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 21:58, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Joe Schriner (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The subject of the article does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Notability is supposed to be based on his perennial presidential candidacy, yet the article provides no actual electoral record or proof that the subject has ever been anything more than one of hundreds of write-in candidates. The article is sourced almost exclusively to first-hand sources (the subject's own web site and articles) and reads more like a promotional piece than an encyclopedia article; third party coverage is limited to a few local newspapers. A presidential candidate needs more widespread media coverage than this to be considered encyclopedically notable. Jah77 (talk) 10:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, (not that it matters given this nomination is malformed), subject has received SIGCOV in the Christian Science Monitor:[1], WALB: [2], and NPR:[3]. Devonian Wombat (talk) 05:43, 3 October 2020 (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.