Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Randall Pearce

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 delete. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:42, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Randall Pearce

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

WP:BLP of a political/PR consultant, relying on minimal reliable sourcing and reading far more like the kind of biographical PR blurb, shading toward prosified résumé, that one might read on the subject's own website than like a genuinely substantive encyclopedia article. While there are certainly statements in here that might get him over a notability hump if they could be expanded and sourced well enough to satisfy WP:GNG, nothing here satisfies any of Wikipedia's "automatically eligible for inclusion because X, Y or Z" tests. I'm willing to revisit this if the sourcing can be substantively improved, but there's not enough of it here in the article's current state to get him over the bar — even the two sources which are present in the article merely namecheck his existence rather than being about him in any meaningful way. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 22:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no indication of notability. Local politician with no significant media coverage; nothing regarding his scientific endeavours found via Google Scholar. The best source I found indicates he merely featured amont the "also ran", getting 17% of the vote in some election. [1] Huon (talk) 13:17, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, No significant coverage in the news. SpeedDemon520 (talk) 01:14, 31 May 2015 (UTC) Sock comment struck. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:19, 1 June 2015 (UTC) [reply]
delete fails WP:BIO. Yes he's worked for notable people but that doesn't make you notable yourself. LibStar (talk) 14:01, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, like Nom, I cannot find anything like sufficient sources.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:27, 2 June 2015 (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.