Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inigo Bing

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. Nom hasn't done any searches beforehand thus not following WP:BEFORE - All have been nominated within seconds of each other so closing as SK (This should've been closed weeks ago so not sure why it never was....) (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 15:22, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Inigo Bing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

I don't believe Circuit judges in England and Wales are de facto notable individuals. There are over 600 of these and they rank below high court judges. Also was a councillor on Lambeth London Borough Council but never succeeded in attempts to gain election to Parliament which would have constituted notability in its own right. Uhooep (talk) 10:42, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 15:06, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 15:06, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 15:06, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I don't believe all Circuit judges in England and Wales are de facto notable individuals, however Bing has an entry in Who's Who which suggests he is particulrly notable. Wikipedia does not put a numerical restriction on how many notable circuit judges it allows. Graemp (talk) 08:26, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as several of these have been deleted as it is and this one is simply questionably better for notability and improvements. Move to Draft at best if needed, SwisterTwister talk 05:20, 27 March 2016 (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.