Knowledge

:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Buettner - Knowledge

Source 📝

484:
as saying what you want it to say. But it doesn't. It says all judges who hold statewide office (which he clearly does, as a judge of a central appellate court which deals with the whole state as opposed to a part of the state) are notable. It's quite clear. It's not open to interpretation. It says
578:
If we had several sources showing this judges actions were impactful, we could keep the article. However, at this level judges are not treated as statewide office holders, but as local ones. In the same way we do not create articles on all trustees of universities that are elected statewide and
161: 422:
other judge with an article besides Buettner, and even that article has quite a bit more substance (although not brilliant sourcing) beyond just stating that she exists, which is all that's present here. A
466:
from having to be improved. It has yet to be shown, however, that Buettner (or any other judge at his level) has the necessary degree of sourceability to be improvable from where this is right now.
114: 209: 155: 249: 427:
article about an appellate court judge, sure, by all means — but there's exactly zero value in a boilerplate article which just says the subject exists, the end.
229: 579:
similar positions. Statewide office holders in the judicial sense means members of the state supreme court, or equivalently named similar court.
280:, but it is not an automatic inclusion freebie that entitles the judge to keep an unsourced article just because his profile on the court's own 121: 87: 82: 91: 366:
get a notability freebie just by having a staff profile on the website of their own employer — they get in the door by having enough
324:
as a judge who holds a statewide office. An official website is clearly not "self-published" and is a perfectly reliable source. --
74: 458:
get enough coverage to pass GNG and their articles are always improvable accordingly — but the article gets the pass because it's
176: 17: 143: 388:
however confirm that he holds the post and his biographical details, which was my point. I notice you haven't addressed
450:
pass GNG. Even if an article about a state or federal legislator is technically inadequate in its existing form, we
547: 137: 607: 584: 40: 588: 568: 528: 494: 475: 401: 379: 333: 312: 293: 261: 241: 221: 201: 56: 133: 603: 257: 237: 217: 197: 183: 78: 36: 410:
to judges on intermediate-level courts — there's no automatic presumption of notability for all judges
580: 490: 481: 434:
extend an automatic presumption of notability to all holders, we don't do so because they're somehow
407: 397: 389: 329: 321: 507:
enjoy the same presumption of notability that higher ones do, and (b) the articles still have to be
301:
judge of the Highest level of state appellate courts is notable, but not necessarily below that.
169: 524: 499:
No, I'm not "interpreting" anything in terms of what I want it to say. AFD has an established
471: 375: 289: 281: 149: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
602:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
253: 233: 213: 193: 70: 62: 486: 393: 325: 559: 515:
from having to have reliable source coverage just because a notability claim has been
192:
Subject appears to fail GNG. I found no evidence of sources demonstrating notability.
439: 308: 277: 520: 467: 371: 285: 273: 53: 108: 272:. Being an appellate court judge can be a notability criterion, if he can be 418:
level of an appellate court. Going by this court's article, there's only
303: 406:
DGG's comment above you is entirely correct about the relationship of
485:
nothing about only the top-level appellate judges being notable. --
596:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
550:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
104: 100: 96: 346:
form of direct affiliation with the subject. I didn't
168: 430:
And even for the levels of political office where we
362:
him, which is still a direct affiliation. People do
556:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 276:as the subject of enough media coverage to clear 43:). No further edits should be made to this page. 610:). No further edits should be made to this page. 210:list of Politicians-related deletion discussions 342:A source cannot support notability if it has 250:list of Oklahoma-related deletion discussions 182: 8: 350:the court's website was "self-published" by 248:Note: This debate has been included in the 228:Note: This debate has been included in the 208:Note: This debate has been included in the 284:website nominally verifies that he exists. 392:, an established notability guideline! -- 247: 227: 207: 358:self-published by the organization that 230:list of Law-related deletion discussions 7: 442:— we do that because we know for a 24: 18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 462:, not because it's in any way 1: 589:20:02, 24 November 2017 (UTC) 569:17:01, 18 November 2017 (UTC) 529:15:30, 23 November 2017 (UTC) 495:13:55, 22 November 2017 (UTC) 480:It seems you're interpreting 476:19:45, 15 November 2017 (UTC) 402:16:49, 15 November 2017 (UTC) 380:16:39, 15 November 2017 (UTC) 334:16:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC) 313:00:52, 15 November 2017 (UTC) 294:17:38, 11 November 2017 (UTC) 262:17:19, 11 November 2017 (UTC) 242:17:19, 11 November 2017 (UTC) 222:17:19, 11 November 2017 (UTC) 202:17:19, 11 November 2017 (UTC) 57:07:30, 26 November 2017 (UTC) 503:that (a) lower-level courts 627: 599:Please do not modify it. 32:Please do not modify it. 370:coverage to clear GNG. 320:. Clearly notable per 438:from having to pass 581:John Pack Lambert 571: 567: 264: 244: 224: 618: 601: 566: 564: 557: 555: 553: 551: 274:properly sourced 187: 186: 172: 124: 112: 94: 71:Kenneth Buettner 63:Kenneth Buettner 34: 626: 625: 621: 620: 619: 617: 616: 615: 614: 608:deletion review 597: 572: 560: 558: 546: 544: 129: 120: 85: 69: 66: 48:The result was 41:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 624: 622: 613: 612: 592: 591: 554: 543: 542: 541: 540: 539: 538: 537: 536: 535: 534: 533: 532: 531: 511:, and are not 428: 337: 336: 315: 296: 282:self-published 266: 265: 245: 225: 190: 189: 126: 65: 60: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 623: 611: 609: 605: 600: 594: 593: 590: 586: 582: 577: 574: 573: 570: 565: 563: 552: 549: 530: 526: 522: 518: 514: 510: 506: 502: 498: 497: 496: 492: 488: 483: 482:WP:POLITICIAN 479: 478: 477: 473: 469: 465: 461: 457: 453: 449: 445: 441: 437: 433: 429: 426: 421: 417: 413: 409: 408:WP:POLITICIAN 405: 404: 403: 399: 395: 391: 390:WP:POLITICIAN 387: 383: 382: 381: 377: 373: 369: 365: 361: 357: 353: 349: 345: 341: 340: 339: 338: 335: 331: 327: 323: 322:WP:POLITICIAN 319: 316: 314: 310: 306: 305: 300: 297: 295: 291: 287: 283: 279: 275: 271: 268: 267: 263: 259: 255: 251: 246: 243: 239: 235: 231: 226: 223: 219: 215: 211: 206: 205: 204: 203: 199: 195: 185: 181: 178: 175: 171: 167: 163: 160: 157: 154: 151: 148: 145: 142: 139: 135: 132: 131:Find sources: 127: 123: 119: 116: 110: 106: 102: 98: 93: 89: 84: 80: 76: 72: 68: 67: 64: 61: 59: 58: 55: 51: 44: 42: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 598: 595: 575: 561: 545: 516: 512: 508: 504: 500: 463: 459: 455: 451: 447: 443: 435: 431: 424: 419: 415: 411: 385: 367: 363: 359: 355: 351: 347: 343: 317: 302: 298: 269: 191: 179: 173: 165: 158: 152: 146: 140: 130: 117: 49: 47: 31: 28: 254:Lepricavark 234:Lepricavark 214:Lepricavark 194:Lepricavark 156:free images 562:Sandstein 487:Necrothesp 460:improvable 454:that they 446:that they 394:Necrothesp 326:Necrothesp 604:talk page 501:consensus 354:— but it 37:talk page 606:or in a 548:Relisted 517:asserted 513:exempted 464:exempted 436:exempted 115:View log 39:or in a 521:Bearcat 509:sourced 468:Bearcat 416:highest 372:Bearcat 360:employs 299:Delete. 286:Bearcat 162:WP refs 150:scholar 88:protect 83:history 54:Spartaz 576:Delete 448:always 440:WP:GNG 278:WP:GNG 270:Delete 134:Google 92:delete 50:delete 505:don't 412:below 368:media 309:talk 177:JSTOR 138:books 122:Stats 109:views 101:watch 97:links 16:< 585:talk 525:talk 491:talk 472:talk 452:know 444:fact 425:good 414:the 398:talk 376:talk 330:talk 318:Keep 290:talk 258:talk 238:talk 218:talk 198:talk 170:FENS 144:news 105:logs 79:talk 75:edit 420:one 386:can 384:It 364:not 352:him 348:say 344:any 304:DGG 184:TWL 113:– ( 587:) 527:) 519:. 493:) 474:) 456:do 432:do 400:) 378:) 356:is 332:) 311:) 292:) 260:) 252:. 240:) 232:. 220:) 212:. 200:) 164:) 107:| 103:| 99:| 95:| 90:| 86:| 81:| 77:| 52:. 583:( 523:( 489:( 470:( 396:( 374:( 328:( 307:( 288:( 256:( 236:( 216:( 196:( 188:) 180:· 174:· 166:· 159:· 153:· 147:· 141:· 136:( 128:( 125:) 118:· 111:) 73:(

Index

Knowledge:Articles for deletion
talk page
deletion review
Spartaz
07:30, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Kenneth Buettner
Kenneth Buettner
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Stats
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR
TWL
Lepricavark
talk
17:19, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.