Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronald L. Ellis

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. ✗plicit 23:19, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ronald L. Ellis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Delete per WP:USCJN - [Magistrate judges] are.. "not inherently notable" and per consensus at WP:Articles for deletion/Margaret J. Schneider Snickers2686 (talk) 21:55, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Snickers2686 (talk) 21:55, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:20, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Found some passing mentions about this person, but nothing more. Subject does not pass WP:JUDGE or WP:GNG. User:Let'srun 01:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Subject meets GNG and JUDGE. Kojavak (talk) 01:20, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Magistrate judge with no other claim to notability. Fails both JUDGE and GNG: no independent, significant, coverage of them.--Jasper Deng (talk) 01:48, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. -Tumbuka Arch (talk) 16:38, 29 November 2023 (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.