Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark W. Pedersen

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. RL0919 (talk) 05:48, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mark W. Pedersen

[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)

Poorly sourced WP:BLP of a magistrate judge at the district court level. This is not an "inherently" notable level of judgeship that automatically guarantees a Wikipedia article per WP:USJUDGE -- a person at this level can get in the door if they can be referenced well enough to clear WP:GNG, but is not automatically entitled to keep an article on bad sourcing just because he exists. The footnotes here, however, consist of his primary source staff profile on the self-published website of his own employer, which is not a notability-supporting source, and one short blurb announcing his appointment in Buffalo's local newspaper, which is not enough media coverage to get him over the bar all by itself as the only media source in play. Bearcat (talk) 03:55, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 03:55, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 03:55, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No indication of encyclopedic notability under guidelines set forth in WP:USCJN. If the subject puts in a few decades of service in the position, they would have a more likely claim to notability. BD2412 T 01:05, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete magistrate judges are not default notable and nothing comes close to showing notability otherwise.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:35, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - almost there, but fails my standards. Bearian (talk) 22:02, 22 January 2020 (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.