Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Bemmes

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Eugene van der Pijll 14:07, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tom Bemmes

Non-notable politician. Only ran for one office, in 2005, garnering 1.5% of the vote in the June primaries. ral315 18:13, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete non-notable Soltak 18:46, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a repository of every fact known to mankind.Gaius Cornelius 15:24, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep strongly. Proposer has moved that Bemmes and other candidates in the June 14th primary be removed on the grounds they did not do well. He has an article so to make a complete record of the election. I do not think it fair to decide legitimate candidates for an important office do not merit articles because they did not do well in the campaign. Bemmes has run for office before and been elected, contrary to the proposer's statement above. PedanticallySpeaking 14:47, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete for reasons stated at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Peter Fossett. -R. fiend 15:55, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep or Merge for reasons given at Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Peter_Fossett. As an aside, "only ran for one office" may not mean much here, since this is a recent campaign. One or more of them could easily run for office again and win that election. --JamesB3 16:13, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete ... they could also use Judo to save the world from attacking space slugs too, but we don't include articles based on possible future notability. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:44, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
• [s]Merge. See opinion on VfD/Peter Fossett. Aerion//talk 03:59, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete--candidates this minor are not notable. There's no way he deserves his own article, as opposed to being mentioned in a table listing the results. Meelar (talk) 13:41, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Keep. Agree with Pedantically Speaking. Academic Challenger 05:48, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.