Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Court usher


 * 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 (no consensus). TigerShark (talk) 21:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Court usher

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Little more than an unsourced dictionary definition that hasn't been expanded or improved since tagged over 9 months ago. Zim Zala Bim talk  13:21, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect Would suggest merging and redirecting to Courtroom unless someone can find some reliable sources to improve the article. Davewild (talk) 14:29, 15 June 2008 (UTC) Keep per the sources found by Phil Bridger which do offer the potential for a good article to be written. Davewild (talk) 17:04, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge possibly to courtroom. If more information and sources can be found, the information would likel fit in. Otherwise, Delete. Red  Thunder  14:51, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.   --  brew  crewer  (yada, yada) 16:29, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Jury trial. I was going to try and rescue this, but it's essentially a ceremonial/administrative position, albeit one that's in fairly widespread use across a variety of jurisdictions, including most of the Commonwealth, parts of Europe and the International Criminal Court. Still, after a bit of a dig around various sources I'm getting the impression that anything I could put together would be on the wrong side of OR. Although there are a variety of nuances, the position is most likely going to be encountered as part of a Jury trial and therefore that's the best place for a mention in my view. There is quite a good grab in Jury (England and Wales), but the position is used in a much wider range of jurisdictions than that, hence Jury trial. In my view courtroom is a little too general to be a useful redirect. Debate   木  23:10, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep the article per Phil Bridger. Hopefully he uses those thousands of links for good and not evil. Debate   木  13:24, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Trust me. I know what I'm doing. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:14, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. This is not a dictionary definition as it describes a role rather than a phrase. Any possible merging is really a matter for the article talk page rather than AfD, but a merge to Jury trial is certainly not the way to go. My one and only court appearence was in a magistrates' court where there is no jury and I very clearly recall there being an usher there. If you want the article sourced then why not put in a reference to the very first hit from the Google search which should have been done before even considering nominating this for deletion. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:33, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems that we disagree about what constitutes reliable sources. In my view court info pages, or position descriptions from commercial (job-search) websites don't cut it. nb. a search of quality academic and legal databases turns up nothing significant. Debate   木  01:48, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Why would you expect references in academic and legal databases to an administrative position? It's not the sort of thing that invites academic research. If we insisted on academic sources we wouldn't be able to have all those Pokemon articles, and then where would we be? Anyway I've put references in the article to a couple of these 1780 Google Books hits, which also include this entry in a paper encyclopedia. I've also removed the word "British" from the article because it's clear from scanning through those Google Books hits that this position exists in many parts of the world. One of the references I added also confirms that this position exists in magistrates' courts, so a redirect to Jury trial would certainly not be a good idea. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:48, 17 June 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.