Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David S. Cunningham III

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 no consensus‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:16, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

David S. Cunningham III[edit]

[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)

Subject does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NJUDGE. Let'srun (talk) 02:34, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and California. Let'srun (talk) 02:34, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article fails WP:GNG and WP:NJUDGE. "References" (actually external links) 2 and 3 are broken and the 1st is his highly unofficial "profile". IncompA 03:44, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I fixed the broken links and added some more references. He seems notable not only as a high-profile judge whose rulings are often in the news but as someone arrested by the UCLA police for "driving while black" and winning a settlement from the university. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 07:07, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per Eastmain. There are in-depth sources about him: [1], [2], [3], [4]. 129.222.136.103 (talk) 19:21, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to assess changes to the article and sources brought up in this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:42, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete Yes, there are sources, but I don't see how they would be particularly noteworthy compared to other judges in large cities. In terms of the police brutality incident, he attracted some attention. I'm leaning towards WP:1E applying here, however. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:19, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:48, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, meets WP:BASIC per sources we have available. I do not believe WP:1E applies, as the subject has coverage for multiple things presidtion of police commission of a large city, superior court judge of a large city, victim of police brutality. I believe the subject is not excluded by WP:VICTIM either due to the nature of the settlement. —siro χ o 06:07, 1 September 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.