Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Hinchcliffe (political strategist)

Tom Hinchcliffe (political strategist)

Tom Hinchcliffe (political strategist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks notability - an MP is notable, their office staff aren't. Cabayi (talk) 13:30, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 13:30, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 13:32, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

• Comment NPOL is not applicable to office staff, subject should be compared to WP:GNG. Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) -  13:46, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
• Delete, fails WP:BIO and WP:Promo — Preceding unsigned comment added by EC Racing (talk • contribs)
• Delete - what the nominator said; the sources are largely about Fabian Hamilton, and while I enjoyed his anti-grammar school rant on the Huffington Post, that's a piece written by him, not about him, which is no good for an independent article. He has the potential to be notable in, say, ten years time, but that's no good. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
• Delete - Why wasn't it CSD'd A7? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:42, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Because it doesn't meet the criteria - in this case there's a case to merge with Hamilton's article or it's possible my google-fu is not very good. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:05, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

MergeI propose merging this with Fabian Hamilton as it seems extremely relevant to his page.Pigeon0999 (talk) 10:29, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Merge Anything Hamilton does publicly is directed through him so should be merged