Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eduard Anton Eugène van Meeuwen


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Bungle (talk • contribs) 13:40, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Eduard Anton Eugène van Meeuwen

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Doesn't meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Possible ATDs are merge/redirect to father or family's page Boleyn (talk) 12:28, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:45, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:45, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:45, 7 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. Judges are automatically notable. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:00, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is a historic figure so there is no WP:BLP concern. Given the amount of coverage that Van Meeuwen's career and his cases received in various dailies in the Netherlands and the Dutch East Indies, he does meet the WP:GNG. gidonb (talk) 23:05, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:GNG per the sources found by User:Gidonb. VocalIndia (talk) 04:00, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. All judges aren't notable, but supreme court judges certainly are per WP:POLITICIAN. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:12, 11 August 2021 (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.