Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James H. Chadbourn


 * 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) v/r - TP 03:20, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

James H. Chadbourn

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Reads like an obituary from a family member. Doesn't appear to satisfy notability thresholds. Jrcla2 (talk) 13:31, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:01, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:01, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:01, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Passes WP:Prof on GS cites and WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:42, 9 June 2011 (UTC).
 * Speedy keep. Named chair at Harvard, obituary in the New York Times. What more do we need? —David Eppstein (talk) 05:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree that an obit in a major national newspaper such as the New York Times is probably enough to make him notable on its own. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:32, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. Incidentally, there's also an award named after him. Ka Faraq Gatri (talk) 17:19, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. The nominator might like to withdraw this inappropriate nomination to reduce the workload of contributors to this area. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:46, 10 June 2011 (UTC).
 * Keep, per David Eppstein and Xxanthippe above. At the very least, passes WP:Prof as holder of a named chair at Harvard. To be fair to the nominator, at the time of nomination the article looked like this:, and it indeed read like an obit written by a family member. Shortly after the nomination, I removed several large chunks of WP:OR/resume type stuff, and in its current form the article is a reasonable stub. Nsk92 (talk) 13:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Chadbourn was a major figure in the law of evidence in the U.S. The law of evidence is not important? It is important and Chadbourn was important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SomeoneLitAnyone (talk • contribs) 07:16, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * SomeoneLitAnyone: please read the WP:NPOV and WP:OR policies before making major edits to this article. Your edits, such as this one, are clear violations of these policies and have been reverted. Thank you, Nsk92 (talk) 08:03, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Dear Nsk92, 1. The prior "edit" of the entry deleted most of it, and it amounted to a deletion of the entry for Chadbourn. 2. General point (to all), Biographical sketches even in an encyclopedia do not have to be bare of all personal details. Chadbourn had an impact on people (e.g., former Justice Souter) in part because of his Chadbourn's wit. And isn't it interesting and perhaps important that Chardborn participated in the anti-lynching campaign in the early 1930s? I think so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SomeoneLitAnyone (talk • contribs) 22:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, of course, my edit removed most of the entry that you wrote, as was necessary since your text was written in a way almost entirely incompatible with Wikipedia's standard's and policies. Your text was written in the style of an enthusiastic personal tribute - the thing prohibited by WP:NPOV, one of the fundamental Wikipedia policies. It was also written largely as a piece of original research - which is again prohibited by another fundamental Wikipedia editing policy, WP:NOR. It is not an issue of being interesting (of course the subject is interesting), it is an issue of how your text is written. Nsk92 (talk) 22:48, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * All of the contributors here think the subject is interesting (and notable), apart from the nominator, most of whose edits have been in the area of basketball. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:32, 14 June 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.