Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gale E. Krouse


 * 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   delete. The argument that serving on a military appeals court is equivalent to serving in a civilian national appellate court does not seem to be supported by policy or consensus here. Although the court itself and some of the incidents it handled are undeniably notable notability is not inherited. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:56, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Gale E. Krouse

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Probably a nice guy but does not meet notability requirements for Wikipedia. Simply is just another lawyer who had a case that some remember but many do not. Also not notable as a politician. Just an old lawyer from the last century.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * delete Non notable lawyer, no awards, failes WP:N, if we have this article then we should have 100,000 other lawyer biographies. Spevw (talk) 20:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. The presiding judge of a United States appellate court would seem to qualify as notable under WP:POLITICIAN #1.--Arxiloxos (talk) 06:15, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete just a random person, the same can be said for many thousands of people therefore making wikipedia overcrowded by biographys. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seasider91 (talk • contribs) 12:24, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:POLITICIAN, as noted by Arxiloxos: this is a type of national judgeship, just like a typical district-level federal judge. Nyttend (talk) 19:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Not "just like". It isn't so it does not qualify. Delete Ryan White Jr. (talk) 02:51, 4 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak keep because the person had an obituary in the Washington Post and presided an appellate court. But that judgeship alone does not suffice for the purposes of WP:POLITICIAN, because the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is not a national court of general jurisdiction, but rather a specialized military court.  Sandstein   09:47, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. The refs demonstrate he isn't notable. Lawyer, lower level judge, served in the military. A good guy I'm sure. Szzuk (talk) 21:43, 6 February 2011 (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.