Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert G. Flanders, 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The result was  speedy keep/withdrawn - seemingly nominated on the basis of a misunderstanding. (Non-admin close). Stalwart 111  03:02, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Robert G. Flanders, Jr.

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet WP:GNG and seems to be a part of a suite of articles written by single-use accounts trussing up subjects surrounding Nicholas Alahverdian, which is also being considered for deletion. May also violate WP:BLP. NewAccount4Me (talk) 00:45, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Rhode Island-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:49, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Welcome to Wikipedia! State Supreme Court justices pass criterion #1 of WP:POLITICIAN. This one is easily verifiable with a Google search if present references aren't strong enough. • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, wow, I forgot what "associate justice" meant. Massive brainfart. Just trying to clean up the mess associated with all of these single-purpose accounts on the Nicholas Alahverdian article. This might not be the right place to ask, but how should one handle the Rhode Island Department of Children, Youth & Families article? Just make it better? Thanks! NewAccount4Me (talk) 01:00, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep State Supreme Court justices are presumed to be notable, and no contrary evidence has been presented. This is not the appropriate venue to discuss how to improve other articles, except to say "improve it".  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  02:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm the AfD initiator and now believe this article should be kept. As I stated above, I mistook "associate justice" as a different meaning. NewAccount4Me (talk) 02:21, 17 August 2013 (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.