Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Little (attorney)

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 of the debate was Delete. Deathphoenix ʕ 14:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Little (attorney)[edit]

Non-notable attorney, created originally by User:Boblittle, indicating vanity. I think only especially notable lawyers deserve articles. AdamBiswanger1 05:53, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete advertising. Never mind the question of who would try to find a lawyer on Wikipedia - is that picture really helping his case? Opabinia regalis 06:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete obvious vanity. Subject is not notable enough either. Ydam 10:11, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, advert, and given the author WP:VANITY. The fact that User:Boblittle also created this article, uploaded his picture (Jan 17th, 2006) and nothing else should also count against it, and strongly towards being spam and an advert. If he'd contributed elsewhere I might have, at least, offered him the chance to demonstrate notability with links to reliable press coverage... but as it is... DELETE. - Motor (talk) 11:21, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but be careful about personal attacks Opabina. --D -Day ^{I'm all ears} 15:36, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. W guice 20:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He is yocto-notable, but that is above my threshold for inclusion. snug 22:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Snug, please review WP:BIO. While you certainly may support keeping this article, it is much better to convince other editors why he is notable, rather than to state your opinion, which is in direct opposition to a guideline. AdamBiswanger1 01:32, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Not an average lawyer. Article states: "A published author of scholarly articles on criminal legal issues, Little is one of about a dozen American lawyers both Board Certified as a Criminal Trial Specialist by the National Board of Trial Advocacy and a life member of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers." TruthbringerToronto 03:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Kershner 23:20, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Aside from being one of very few lawyers to be board certified/life member (see above), he is also an elected official. I've seen him on CourtTV, too. (And, I will say that I don't want to see my changes to his page go down the crapper.) -HiFiGuy 01:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(PS: Just found this Trial set to open in woman's slaying on the Star Ledger website. Stale 2003 murder, and yet it gets ink two weeks before the trial opens. Hmm...)
Delete. The board-certified/life-member combo is not the sort of special accomplishment that would justify inclusion in an encyclopedia. According to the [NACDL website], any attorney can spend $5000 to be a life member. So Mr. Little is a certified trial specialist, and he's splurged for a life membership in an organization of attorneys, whereas most of his counterparts apparently renew their memberships by the year. Kickaha Ota 15:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. IMO non-notable. --Atrian 03:22, 22 June 2006 (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.