Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph S. Johnston (judge)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 no consensus for deletion, defaulting to keep. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 08:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph S. Johnston (judge)

Joseph S. Johnston (judge) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

I just don't think this person is notable. I don't see what he has done in particular, other than a normal job. Jackaranga (talk) 18:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Important note Please see http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/A2F6GYJPGSTZ2Y and you will see his amazon profile. Now note how the user's nickname on Amazon is gulfy and the creator of this article is User:Gulfy32, coincidence ? Jackaranga (talk) 18:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete No assertion of notability. State judges are not inherently notable. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 19:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, fails WP:BIO and WP:LOCAL. --Dhartung | Talk 19:58, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per Dhartung's assertion's. ArcAngel (talk) 20:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, local judge who does not appear to meet WP:N criteria. I did a Google search that was restricted to AL.com, the website of the Mobile Press-Register, and turned up nothing. (Full disclosure: I work for the Press-Register's sister newspaper in Birmingham and for AL.com.) More generic Google searches turned up a handful of news-story references, nothing particularly notable. This smells like a vanity article. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 20:56, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak keep State circuit court judge. I think that's more than local. as a judge of appellate jurisdiction there ought to be some material on notable cases. "Handful of news story references" might be enough for notability, depending of what they say about him. DGG (talk) 03:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep I will see if I can find some more information on him that make him notable. He is a state judge, not a local/city judge. Just to clarify, I am not Joseph S. Johnston. Gulfy32 —Preceding comment was added at 18:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I hope none of you critics are being partisan (Democrat) Johnson was the first Republican state judge in this circuit, and this state is very Democratic in local politics. He has been elected 3 times without opposition. There are Wiki articles on Sam Jones (Mobile city mayor) a Democrat, Montgomery Mayor Bobby bright, a Democrat, and Vivian Berkerle, a local activist who ran for congress. I know of another dozen Alabama politicians--all Democrat that hold lesser office than a circuit judge. Go to the internet archives if you really want to google as most news stories are removed in a few weeks. If you go to the archives you will find dozens of news articles with national implications. For example, the sentencing of Dallas Cowboys player Leonardo Carson. In fact, Johnston was criticized in a book call "Spoiled Sports". Also, read about the capital murder trial of Thomas Lane who was sentenced to death for murdering his so-called mail order bride.Dauphin1999 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 01:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC) HYPOCRISY and Content Bias One of our editors has also FAVORABLY edited the Wiki article of a Mayor Heather Fargo mayor of Sacramento, Ca. I am sure anything or anyone in California is more notable than Alabama, but I fail to see how this California mayor is notable, especially since she "is just doing her job". Could it be because she is liberal and anti Second Amendment? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dauphin1999 (talk • contribs) 03:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep I feel that judges are inherently notable, and I imagine most have received the media coverage required to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. I admit though, this is more based on my personal view, not so much on any policy or guideline. faithless (speak) 05:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Additional comment/rationale for relisting. Although there have been policy based assertions for deleting this article, they were primarily based on lack of reliable sourcing and (more generally) lack of notability. Since the start of this good faith Afd nomination, the article has been expanded significantly, including sources that I've not personally looked through to determine their validity, verifiability and importance. I feel this article, based on apparent improvements and at least a handful of "keep" proponents, deserves another round of discussion. Personally abstaining from !voting or closing this debate. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep notable, enough coverage in article to support the topic and well written. No reason to delete. Dustitalk to me 18:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Sorry, I'm still not seeing it. The references added do little to indicate notability and are basically name mentions, e.g. he's a judge who is not running for higher office. --Dhartung | Talk 23:18, 13 March 2008 (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.