Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey J. Davis


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  00:17, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Jeffrey J. Davis

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

WP:BLP1E; notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. One primary reference; four references in passing in the context of his client. Mentioned once in the article of his client Mani Al-Utaybi, whom he apparently never met, or filed a valid court document on behalf of. THF (talk) 07:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  —THF (talk) 08:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  —THF (talk) 08:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BLP1E and WP:COATRACK.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 16:00, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as subject fails notability requirements.Yachtsman1 (talk) 17:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Guantanamo Bay detainment camp-related deletion discussions.  —GRBerry 22:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:BLP1E applies; all relevant data is already in Mani Shaman Turki al-Habardi Al-Utaybi so there is nothing to merge, and deletion is the right answer. GRBerry 22:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, notability can be inherited in extreme circumstances; for example, Clarence Darrow is far more notable as the defence attorney who represented Scopes, than Scopes is himself. In the case of Guantanamo detainees, those lawyers who have made a career out of representing a specific high-profile detainee (or a number of slightly lower-profile detainees, such as 17 Yemeni detainees simultaneously), are notable and people who google the name deserve to find an unbiased and comprehensive Wiki biography of the person. That may mean rewriting portions of this article, but it certainly doesn't mean deleting it. The fact that this is part of a concerted effort to simultaneously delete the Wiki biographies of almost every Guantanamo lawyer...coming right on the heels of the exact same nominators failing to delete almost 'every'' Guantanamo detainees means that "Assume Good Faith" is strained towards the breaking point. Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 17:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I have never nominated a Guantanamo detainee for deletion. I've reviewed 30 or so Guantanamo attorney articles, and nominated about half of them for deletion.  No one claims Darrow is notable because he represented Snopes; he's notable because he has multiple books written about him, and was the leading lawyer of his day.  When Mr. Davis has a tenth of that level of notability, no one will contest him getting a Wikipedia article.  You've cut and paste the same accusation of bad faith in multiple AFDs, which hardly suggests that you are performing your own good-faith evaluation. THF (talk) 17:53, 13 March 2009 (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.