Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Dorsey


 * 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  00:15, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Jim Dorsey

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

WP:BIO notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. One primary source, two sources that mention him in passing in the context of his client, each with the same quote. Everything else is sketchy resume details and an attempt to WP:PUFF his one quote ("Dorsey commented on a letter") into notability. THF (talk) 07:49, 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) 15:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, nonnotable lawyer. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:41, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, per prior points as subject is simply not notable.Yachtsman1 (talk) 17:19, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Guantanamo Bay detainment camp-related deletion discussions.  —GRBerry 22:38, 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)


 * 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.