Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pike Hall 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 00:13, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Pike Hall Jr.

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable politician. Fails WP:GNG. Sources include: A note by the article's creator on the suffix of Mr. Hall and his family, an Ancestry.com search, his father's Find A Grave page, two obituaries, a list of members of the Louisiana House of Representatives, a brief mention in a political retrospective for 2007-2008, a newsletter, and an article from 1964 on his election to a school board. Penale52 (talk) 11:46, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep meets WP:NPOL as a state supreme court justice. Article needs to be seriously redone, so maybe WP:TNT it and start from the beginning? Best, GPL93 (talk) 13:30, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:NPOL as and Associate Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court. --Enos733 (talk) 20:23, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Enos733 (talk) 20:23, 21 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep a clear pass of WP:NPOL and also WP:GNG.--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:55, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep State supreme court justices are automatically notable....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:27, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep and flag for refimprove. Yes, the article needs improvement — it's referenced in exactly classic Billy Hathorn fashion — but this person does have a stronger notability claim than usual for Billy Hathorn creations: state supreme court justices are notable enough for articles, so long as the claim that they served on the supreme court is verifiable as true. Bearcat (talk) 17:44, 27 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.