Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew G. Geishecker


 * 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.  Sandstein  12:47, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Andrew G. Geishecker

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not being a judge at the state level, doesn't meet WP:NPOL, and there isn't enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:45, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose He was a judge at the state level, serving in the Massachusetts District Court. --Slugger O&#39;Toole (talk) 14:53, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:45, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:45, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:38, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 22:27, 23 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete state court judges only meet notability standards if they serve at a statewide capacity. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:28, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing in the article or sources indicates he was anything more than a run-of-the-mill trial-court-level state judge. TJRC (talk) 20:26, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Just because the Massachusetts District Court is a statewide body does not mean every individual judge on it gets an automatic free pass over our notability criteria for judges; it is the basic trial court, not a higher-level appeals or supreme court, and is divided into several distinct regions rather than one statewide jurisdictional area. So the notability test he has to pass is not simply that he's verifiable as having existed — it's that he can be shown to pass WP:GNG on a sufficient depth and range and volume of coverage about him. But that's not what these references are showing: the only one that's about him to any non-trivial degree is the merely expected obituary, while the remainder of the sources are (a) a comprehensive list of every judge on the court, which namechecks them all without being about any of them, (b) a brief and unsubstantive blurb, and (c) strictly genealogical paid-inclusion death and marriage notices for his non-notable relatives. This is not how you make a judge notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Bearcat (talk) 15:52, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete While I suppose that there was something notable in his career, which antedates the internet, we don't have any evidence yet.  I am assuming he was a trial judge in the court of general jurisdictio the lowest trial court Massachusetts District Court in Massachusetts.  Does not meet WP:GNG, which applies I think.  Longevity in the position doesn't butter any parsnips, either.  7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 02:26, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete.A.Jacobin (talk) 14:55, 27 June 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.