Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Palmer (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. Sarah-Jane (talk) 19:39, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Palmer (judge)[edit]

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

This seems to be a random list of routine judgments by this justice. Nothing exceptional here. Even some of the Chief Justices of the Supreme_Court_of_British_Columbia don't warrant articles Legacypac (talk) 00:56, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. 174.6.102.144 (talk) 18:07, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:35, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:35, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Despite the name of the judge's court, the Supreme Court of British Columbia is not actually the court that is supreme in British Columbia; that would be the British Columbia Court of Appeal. "Supreme" in this case merely distinguishes it from even smaller local courts. This is similar to, for example, the New York Supreme Court, another "supreme court" that is not, in fact, supreme. Given that this is not the highest court in the province, I'd want to see specific bases for the judge's notability in the article, and I don't. TJRC (talk) 21:45, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not a judge of a high enough court for inherent notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:50, 30 November 2015 (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.