Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estes v. Texas

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP. Golbez 05:40, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

Estes v. Texas
Doesn't look notable, but then, there's so little actual encyclopaedic info that I don't know. Joe D (t) 00:23, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Methinks court cases are inherently notable. That said, the article could use a HUGE rewrite.  Keep, stamp on a cleanup tag. BLANKFAZE | (&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;??) 00:58, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * ...With some provisos, no? I mean, there are probably hundreds of Smith v. Smith divorce cases that aren't particularly unique or exciting.  Supreme Court cases, though, are generally notable. --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 17:47, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup. Notable US Supreme Court case relating to coverage of court cases by media. Billy Sol Estes was a former intimate of LBJ who was jailed in 1962 for fraud involving cotton allotments. He was freed after this case on the grounds that the presence of television cameras in the courts were prejudicial to his trial. Capitalistroadster 02:16, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep!!! The U.S. Supreme Court decides about 80-100 cases per year, and only takes them when important questions about the meaning of the Constitution, laws, and treaties of the U.S. are on the line. Admittedly, some of those are still boring (e.g. is there a constitutional interest rate for cram-down loans in a bankruptcy proceeding?) but this is not one of them. Any U.S. Supreme Court case that has been republished in a textbook as a means of teaching students the relevant law (and this one has - I've seen it!) is inherently notable. -- BD Abram son thi m k 03:43, 2005 May 10 (UTC)
 * Keep. JamesMLane 05:10, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep notable case. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 12:11, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Supreme Court case, notable for reasons outlined by BD2412. --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 17:47, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep...I agree with the above. Supreme Court cases are inherently notable, as would be landmark appeals cases, in my mind.--MikeJ9919 20:18, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Extreme keep and delist. Non-notability not established by nominator.  &mdash;RaD Man (talk) 05:51, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Since nomination the article has been considerably rewritten to actually include some information (note my OP wasn't actually vote so much as a question), and I wouldn't have nominated the article in its current form. Joe D (t) 23:58, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
 * keep all supreme court decisions Sensation002 23:43, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Reminds me of the case Concerned Inclusionists v Gang of Scruffy Deletionists. Klonimus 06:59, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
 * KEEP - every United States Supreme Court case is notable. Kingturtle 18:45, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.