Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seth Kaper-Dale

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 Keep. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 15:51, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seth Kaper-Dale

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

Individual does not meet the level of notability required for a politician, activist, religious figure, or any other standard. Being a candidate in an election does not grant this level of notability. ALPolitico (talk) 13:57, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This individual is notable outsde of his candidacy, being involved in immigration related events that recieved a range of media attention.XavierGreen (talk) 18:05, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Individual is not notable. Facebook page with 1,000 likes in a metro area of millions is limited. Being the Pastor of a Church that accepts refugees does not make a notable public figure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.35.142.136 (talk) 02:13, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:BIO. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:45, 1 February 2017 (UTC) Keep - I found 196 Google News results for Seth Kaper-Dale. Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:46, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Me-123567-Me. J 947 04:49, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2017 February 1. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:09, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Significant coverage in independent sources (see search links above) = passes WP:GNG. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:06, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As others have said, significant coverage from a variety of independent sources, in which he is the primary subject of the coverage, and not merely mentioned. Passes GNG. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 02:35, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the Deletion alerts! at WikiProject Green Politics. Me-123567-Me (talk) 17:18, 12 February 2017 (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.