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 all. Daniel (talk) 09:42, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Terrence M. Andrews

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Judgeship nomination was withdrawn, and there's nothing else to justify an article. This is a logical followup to the verdict of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danny Lam Nguyen. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:54, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:

And I nominate Jon Katchen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for the same reason. We have a small group of editors who focus on United States federal judiciary topics. Some or all of them appear to believe that being the subject of a press release from a certain source constitutes the basis for their notability. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 03:18, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:45, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:46, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:46, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:51, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:51, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:52, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:52, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:54, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all US federal judges are notable, but only once they are confirmed to sit on the bench. Except Jon Katchen should be redirected to Donald_Trump_judicial_appointment_controversies#United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_Alaska. Reywas92^Talk 19:10, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- There are several other failed nominations on that page without further signiifcant coverage that should also be redirected, including James P. Arguelles, Dirk B. Paloutzian, Sandy N. Leal, and Rick Richmond. Clarityfiend, shall I add these to the nomination? Reywas92^Talk 19:15, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - A qualified OK if there aren't any more candidates on the list of Donald Trump judicial appointment controversies, otherwise I'd prefer to keep things from getting unwieldy. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - I counted 27 failed nominees in addition to Katchen. Some may be notable on their own but my spot-check were all those created only for the nomination. Reywas92^Talk 22:26, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all, unless other bases for notability can be found on an individual basis. BD2412 T 21:43, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless WP:GNG is met independent of any failed or expired judicial nominations. And I think I created some of these, but I still think they should be deleted because I have a better understanding of WP:JUDGE now. Marquardtika (talk) 14:27, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom and per Reywas92 above. Kolma8 (talk) 21:24, 12 February 2021 (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.