Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graydon K. Kitchens Jr.


 * 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. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 14:45, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Graydon K. Kitchens Jr.

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL local elected judge who never held a seat on a major court or appellate court. All sources are local newspaper articles, none of which are linked and some of which are untitled, profiles on attorney rating websites, basic government records, and obituaries (some of which aren't even his). GPL93 (talk) 02:39, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:42, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:42, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:43, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete I have to admit I am beggining to be tempted to say we should just mass delete the mess that Hathon has given us. Even in the cases where articles are on notable people, that is more an accident than design, and they tend to be bogged down by sourcing to non-reliable and primary sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:30, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * At times I've thought that too, especially given that I nominate a lot of his articles for deletion (I started out trying simply clean up/get rid of promotional articles of politicians and then Hathorn articles obviously turn up in abundance when searching for WP:NPOL fails). But the problem is that he has created a lot of articles that pass NPOL/GNG and have since been greatly improved, such as a bunch of congressmen senators and governors. It would probably never fly but I think a good solution would be temporarily setting up a deletion sorting category just of his articles so that editors could analyze the AfD's in one place and decide meets standards and what to delete. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:27, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I had to laugh at the idea of Hathorn getting his own deletion sort. Of course I have seen lots of articles I created be deleted, although to be fair at least 2 of those I nominated for deletion, actually at least three.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:36, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I know its ridiculous but when you come across a bunch of articles of long-dead Louisiana city councilmen sourced only with obits and high school yearbooks you think of ridiculous solutions sometimes. GPL93 (talk) 03:58, 27 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. I've been sorely tempted at times to just comprehensively blow out anything Billy Hathorn ever created too, but we don't yet have a consensus that "created by Billy Hathorn" is an automatic speedy criterion in and of itself — the guy did occasionally happen to hit on legitimate notables (e.g. actual Louisiana state legislators) even if he didn't actually source them very differently than the junk, so we have to be careful. If somebody really wants to take on a project of getting his stuff cleaned up properly, another option would be to specifically run the "only show edits that are page creations" filter on his contribution history, so as to systematically root out the junk at the source. But I digress. This is a smalltown local figure who never held any office at a high enough level to clear WP:NPOL or our notability standards for judges, and is not referenced anywhere near well enough to be a valid special case over and above the thousands of other non-notables who've served at the same level. Bearcat (talk) 23:07, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I actually tried that system briefly but its going to take someone with more perseverance than I have, there's just so many junk articles, even most of the ones that meet inclusionary standards should probably be TNTed and re-written from scratch with proper sources. I originally tried proposing articles for deletion but he checks in once or twice a week and de-prods everything using IP socks. The craziest part of all of this is that the guy appears to be a professor, or at least PhD, of history and couldn't appear to understand the basic concept of using proper sources to support his writing. Best, GPL93 (talk) 00:58, 28 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. Good nom. Very well constructed article of a non-notable person (hence the construction). Zero WP:SIGCOV in any solid RS on them.  Job does not automatically qualify for SNG. Clearly there are serious issues per above comments with other articles by this author. Britishfinance (talk) 13:21, 30 March 2019 (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.