Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Stevenson Webster

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 speedy keep. The nom hasn't even bothered with searching for sources as these have all been nominated within seconds of each other. No objections to speedy renomination by anyone except the nom. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 01:38, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Stevenson Webster[edit]

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

I don't believe Circuit judges in England and Wales are de facto notable individuals. There are over 600 of these and they rank below high court judges. All of my recent AFD nominations of English and Welsh Circuit judges have reached a consensus to delete, but of course each AFD should still be judged independently. This individual also stood for Parliament but came third. Uhooep (talk) 01:31, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 02:46, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 02:46, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 02:46, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I created the article and did so because the subject has a dedicated entry in Who's Who (UK). This source was used in compiling the article with details in the Reference section. I have always worked on the basis that this publication is the UK standard on notability and that anyone who was/is notable enough to command an entry is notable enough to pass Wikipedia's notability guidelines. I don't know if this source has been used to define if an individual meets Wikipedia notability but in my view it should be. Obviously some circuit judges are more notable than others and Webster had a political career on top of his legal career which is perhaps why his notability was deemed significant enough for him to be included in Who's Who. I have not taken part in any AfD discussion on the subject of circuit judges so can't comment on others except to say that I would not have been part of any consensus to delete had any of the subjects demonstrated the degree of notability of Webster. Graemp (talk) 07:11, 12 March 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.