Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MelanieN (talk | contribs) at 15:41, 21 October 2011 (→Redirect). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This article was nominated for deletion on 3 September 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was redirect to United States Senate election in Rhode Island, 2012.

Based on the following dialogue, I am recreating the page:

News

WRNI

I consider this to be significant coverage in the place that matters, which is Rhode Island. He is considered the Republican challenger to a sitting US Senator. It makes Misplaced Pages look bad not to have this article. It certainly needs to be improved, but it is a start. Scott Illini (talk) 10:55, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm not the one you need to convince - Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Barry Hinckley is where the decision was made. Your only venue is WP:DRV, but I don't think you'll have much luck there right now. See my comment in the AFD. Toddst1 (talk) 15:27, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

And in the decision, it says "Can be recreated if he meets the normal notability criteria (i.e., substantial third party coverage)." I claim that has now been met. Coverage in Barrington Patch, Westerly Sun, and Boston Globe since September 30th. I am asking you to review my evidence and be persuaded to this conclusion as well. We do not need to involve anyone else. You and I are empowered to resolve this per the decision itself. Scott Illini (talk) 01:48, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

The page has been WP:SALTed. Take it WP:DRV or better yet, drop the stick and back away from the horse. Your conflict of interest is patently obvious. Toddst1 (talk) 04:07, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

I was just trying to get to the right answer. I take Misplaced Pages seriously as well.Scott Illini (talk) 05:35, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Redirect

I am going to return this page to a redirect. That was the consensus opinion at the AfD discussion, and it can only be overcome by consensus (such as by discussion here at this page).

The closing administrator said the page could be recreated if there was "substantial third party coverage", but that has not happened. The coverage since then is purely "horse race" reporting, such as the amount of money he has raised; it is not substantial coverage about him. The only article I found that gives him more than a passing mention is this one, and it is more about the phone-payment technology than it is about him.

Most of the commentators at the AfD said the page should be recreated if he becomes the actual Republican nominee. That cannot happen until the primary, 11 months from now, in September 2012. At this point he is the only declared candidate, but other better-known candidates are expected to declare as the election comes closer. Meanwhile Hinckley is regarded as such a long shot that polling companies don't even include his name in surveys; see United States Senate election in Rhode Island, 2012#Republican primary.

Being the first (and so far only) person to declare his candidacy does not make him "the candidate". If someone were to declare right now that they are a candidate for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, would that make them "the Republican candidate"?

It's clear you are passionate about this candidate, but the requirement remains consensus. The Misplaced Pages community did you a favor by retaining a redirect page for this person. If you continue to recreate this page without consensus, I will renominate it for deletion, and this time I will argue against a redirect page, on the grounds that it is being abused. --MelanieN (talk) 13:16, 21 October 2011 (UTC)