Talk:Thomas Crowther (judge)

Requested move 11 February 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: clear consensus not to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 03:44, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Thomas Crowther (judge) → Thomas Crowther (lawyer) – Subject is no longer is a judge. Please see the text and footnote 3 which is official confirmation of his resignation KodakPaxton (talk) 16:41, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Irrespective of the subject's later activities, their notability is derived from their time as a judge. We have, by way of comparison, lots of articles on long-retired athletes disambiguated by the sport or even the position they once played. In fact, we have lots of articles on long-retired (or long-dead) judges with the same disambiguator. bd2412  T 17:09, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:DEFUNCTS and bd2412. When someone dies, we wouldn't rename the article about them to "Joe Smith (corpse)". —BarrelProof (talk) 18:01, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose as above. Being a judge is the only reason he has an article. Silly proposal, I'm afraid. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:04, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose for all above reasons Psalms79&#59;6-7 (talk) 15:30, 12 February 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.