Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tuan Anuwa Tuan Mat

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:06, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tuan Anuwa Tuan Mat[edit]

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

Non-notable individual. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 21:29, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because these individual are non-notable enough to have Wikipedia stand-alone article. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 03:41, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:48, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:48, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not involve in major notable events or hold a high position in Malaysia's political activities. --QianCheng_虔诚 11:10, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A person does not get a Wikipedia article just for being a candidate in an election — if you cannot show and properly source that they were already notable enough for an article for some reason independent of their candidacy, then they have to win the election, not just run in it, to get an article because election per se. But this makes no claim of preexisting notability, and there's no indication that he won the election (which, based on the article's creation date, is now in the past even though the article itself doesn't actually indicate the election date.) If he runs again the next time and wins, then he'll be eligible for an article because his notability claim will have changed to one that we accept as grounds for an article — but running in an election and losing is not a valid reason for an article in and of itself. Bearcat (talk) 14:42, 6 May 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.