Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clark S. Judge

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. The weight of policy-based arguments is that this article is not subject, the lone !vote to keep does not provide a policy-based argument for why the subject is notable. Hog Farm _Talk 17:46, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clark S. Judge

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NBIO - article does not cite any independent secondary sources about this person. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 03:07, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:22, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:22, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:22, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:22, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep It appears that on Sept. 1, 1988 the President of the United States announced the appointment of the subject of this article to a position in his administration. The press release is already present in the references. I find the suggestion that significant staff members of American presidential administrations might not be note-worthy incredible, and I suggest that the value of Wikipedia as a work of reference would be much diminished if this were to become general practice. Anyone who worked in the White House (in any administration) whose job was important enough to merit a press release surely belongs in Wikipedia in my opinion. Tillander 11:40, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Being a presidential appointee to a minor position is, indeed, not an automatic free pass through WP:NBIO. I ask again - are there any reliable secondary sources to cite about this person? If not, we can't write an article about them. Press releases are not independent secondary sources. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 12:56, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Mr. Judge's position was not default making him notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:50, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sources are Judge's own works, not works about Judge. Hundreds of people work in the White House at a time, many of which get press releases and it is not a basis for automatic notability. Reywas92^Talk 18:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There cannot be articles about every person to have ever worked in a presidential administration or even the White House. The question of an individual’s notoriety must be based on what a person themselves has done that is noteworthy, not working near someone else who had achieved WP:NOTEWORTHY status. Go4thProsper (talk) 02:25, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.