Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Elmore Cropley


 * 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 keep. Liz Read! Talk! 04:25, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Charles Elmore Cropley

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

I do not think the clerk of the Supreme Court is the level of position that makes someone notable. He is a low level background figure who has no actual government role. The coverage we have here is a listing from the Supreme Court itself of all administrative officers, an article that mentions him getting married, in a large set of such announcements that I do not think confers notability on any, and a news article on him dropping a bible during a presidential inauguration. This is just not enough to justify an article in Wikipedia John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:03, 19 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 18:41, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete, agree there is nothing to demonstrate notability here. Happy to reconsider in the event of further sources being found, ping me if so. MarchOfTheGreyhounds (talk) 22:27, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep The Wikipedia article for Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States suggests his role was notable and it looks like he held the role the longest of those listed there. There were a number of obituaries when he died including in The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Washington Evening Star Piecesofuk (talk) 15:05, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep. The Clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court (not to be confused with the law clerks) is the Court's most important statutory officer, and the OP's assertion that the Clerk "has no actual government role" is not true. We rightly have articles on many of the people who have held that office, and should aspire to develop ones on the others. This is obviously far from the most important judiciary-related biography in the encyclopedia, but is has a purpose, and there is no value in the idea of deleting it. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:52, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per above Andrevan @ 21:09, 26 July 2022 (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.