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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Mhhossein ^talk 10:03, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Allen Skillicorn[edit]

Allen Skillicorn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

I know the election will only be a couple weeks away, and I know that there is probably a 99% change of Skillicorn winning the election. However, he has not yet been elected, and he has done nothing, as of the moment, that is noteworthy enough for a Wikipedia article. Until he wins, the article should be deleted. --1990'sguy (talk) 01:40, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator: As others have already pointed out, Skillicorn has won his election. Now he is notable enough to have his own Wikipedia article. --1990'sguy (talk) 01:50, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. 1990'sguy (talk) 02:02, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. 1990'sguy (talk) 02:02, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• At the time I first saw this article a couple of weeks ago while nominating several of the creator's other new articles about unelected Illinois legislative candidates for deletion, this article contained the claim that Skillicorn is a former member of the legislature who left office but is now running to return for a second kick at the can. I'm not an expert on Illinois politics and had no substantive reason to doubt that the statement was true (I'm Canadian, so there's just one state legislator in the entire United States that I could name off the top of my head without consulting a list to do the "oh, wait, yeah, I think I have heard of that one before too" thing first), so on the basis of that claim I left it alone with some maintenance tags — but now that 1990sguy has disputed the claim, I googled Skillicorn and indeed can't find any confirmation that he ever served a prior term in the legislature, because even the legislature's own list of its own members in the 2005-07 term doesn't include him. As always, however, unelected candidates for office do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates: if a person does not already have preexisting notability for other reasons, then they do not qualify for a Wikipedia article until they win the seat and thereby become a holder of a notable office. And even if he does win the seat and become notable on that basis, the article will still have to be significantly rewritten from the quasi-campaign brochure format it's following right now. So no prejudice against recreation on or after November 8 if he wins, but nothing here gets him an article today. (Prior discussion, for the record, is about a different person of the same name, so has no bearing on this at all.) Bearcat (talk) 02:11, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Didn't notice that. Is there a way we can change the article to make clear that the two Allen Skillicorns' are different people? --1990'sguy (talk) 02:28, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In this context it's not necessary. The first one got deleted, so as long as the fact that they're two different people is clarified in this discussion so that people know that "Speedy G4" won't work as a deletion argument, we don't need to do anything special to the article. Bearcat (talk) 02:37, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Update: Due to low participation, this discussion was still open as of election day, and Skillicorn did indeed win his seat. Accordingly, this does now need to be kept, and merely flagged for content and referencing repair. Bearcat (talk) 13:01, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As Bearcat says, he did win the seat. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 00:24, 11 November 2016 (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.