Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bradley Brent Cavedo

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. - Mailer Diablo 08:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bradley Brent Cavedo

Bradley Brent Cavedo (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

I took the prod off this article, I thought it at least deserved an AfD since I couldn't find a notability standard for judges. He is a judge of the Virginia State Circuit Court in an important U.S. city, but there is no notable legal decisions etc. asserted to bolster that. Dougie WII 08:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. I commend Dougie for bringing it here, as it does look questionable. However, merely being a Circuit Court Judge in Virginia, even in Richmond, isn’t really a claim to notability. Richmond alone has eight Circuit Court Judges[1], and there are hundreds of sitting Circuit Court judges in Virginia right now. Factor in all the retired and deceased judges, and we are thousands of judges, possibly tens of thousands. More importantly, the Circuit Court is a trial court of general jurisdiction [2], so they almost never issue formal written opinions. When they do, the opinions have very little precedential authority – the precedent would only apply in the given circuit. Finally, the username of the editor who started the article makes me suspect a WP:COI issue.--Kubigula (talk) 14:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
• Comment We can handle any number of articles if the people are notable, so it wouldn't matter if there were half a million notable judges. . And COI is no reason for deletion, just for scrutiny. DGG (talk) 07:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

• A fair comment. The point I was aiming for is that being a state trial court level judge is not, at least in VA, a sufficient mark of distinction, in and of itself, to justify an article. The reason is that, barring some particular controversy or involvement in a high profile case, these judges are unlikely to be the subject of any significant scholorly or news coverage. I would presume a state appellate court judge, a state supreme court justice or a federal judge to be notable, but not a state trial court judge.--Kubigula (talk) 15:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete I think your argument is right. We do have to check these things state by state, as the titles seem to vary widely, but it does seem that in Virginia this is not a notable position. DGG (talk) 09:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete not notable enough. RMHED (talk) 03:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

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.