Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Driver hearing


 * 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 redirect/move to State v. Driver and refactor/rewrite. Jujutacular (talk) 05:35, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Driver hearing

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete or maybe redirect to Preliminary hearing, sources are primary and cannot find significant coverage in independent WP:RS. Prod contested. Vrac (talk) 11:27, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 05:43, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:06, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:10, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * This doesn't have anything to do with preliminary hearing, nor (unsurprisingly) is this state-specific term mentioned there. If New Jersey evidence law existed, it might potentially be merged there, or perhaps it should be refactored into an article on the State v. Driver case, but it's clearly a meaningful term and concept in NJ law and the complaints about the lack of "independent" sources are misplaced if not wholly inaccurate, given that the primary sources are clearly authoritative. Not to mention the fact that there are no doubt NJ legal practice guides that discuss it, as would be the case with any comparable legal doctrine in any state. I'm having trouble searching online (in part because the New Jersey Law Journal is behind a paywall), but any NJ practitioner, anyone with a Westlaw account, or access to a law library with NJ materials should be able to confirm that. postdlf (talk) 22:47, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep and Move - I like Postdlf's suggestion to refactored into an article on the State v. Driver case. I'm not convinced that the hearing itself is notable; however, it seems that the underlying case is, given that it added a new procedural step to New Jersey criminal law.  It might make sense to move it to Driver v. State, and fashion it more as an article on the case itself (which would probably be pretty much a stub, to start, but that's okay), with details about the Driver hearing as a section, "further developments", or something like that.  This is something like what happened with Giglio material, which was revised and moved (see ) to Giglio v. United States as a result of this AFD. TJRC (talk) 00:04, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:31, 29 August 2015 (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.