Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C. John Stroumtsos

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 17:04, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

C. John Stroumtsos

[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)

Biography of a judge and unsuccessful political candidate, not properly sourced as passing our inclusion criteria for judges or politicians. As always, candidates don't get articles just for being candidates per se -- the notability test for politicians is holding a notable office, not just running for one -- so his includability depends more on the judgeship, but he was a judge on the lower level of the court system, which is also not an automatic notability freebie in the absence of WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage about his career, and the judgeship is sourced solely to the court system's own self-published annual report about itself, which includes his name only in a list of all of the several hundred judges rather than actually featuring any non-trivial content about him, which is not support for notability at all.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have a lot more sourcing and substance than this. Bearcat (talk) 20:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Law, and New Jersey. Bearcat (talk) 20:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Coverage on newspapers.com is exceptionally WP:LOCAL and mostly run-of-the-mill. Example of what the best clippings I found look like; doesn't get him above WP:GNG. Curbon7 (talk) 00:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per WP:USCJN. State appellate judges are not notable by project standards. BD2412 T 02:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - not really notable; he had some factors for my standards, and I could go either way. Bearian (talk) 20:00, 1 June 2022 (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.