Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winfield D. Ong
- 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 redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies. I don't find the argument against redirecting persuasive; the presence of a redirect doesn't say that this individual was controversial, only that the relevant information is found at the target. There is clear consensus against a standalone article. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:34, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Winfield D. Ong
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
The person was not confirmed as a judge and does not meet the notability criteria as described by
WP:GNG. All sources found regarding the subject are primary or namedrops. Let'srun (talk) 09:30, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Law, and Indiana. Let'srun (talk) 09:30, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- Redirect to Barack Obama judicial appointment controversies as we're starting to do with these. We have lawyers statements, and some relatively trivial coverage like [1] but nothing that amounts to SIGCOV as far as I can see. —siroχo 09:51, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- The reason I'm not proposing a redirect is that there isn't much to suggest that Ong was a controversial nominee, and his Senate Judiciary Committee by a voice vote with the support of both Indiana senators. It appears that he simply never received a vote before the end of Obama's 2nd term, and I don't see any other possible redirect targets. Let'srun (talk) 12:58, 24 July 2023 (UTC)]
- The reason I'm not proposing a redirect is that there isn't much to suggest that Ong was a controversial nominee, and his
- Delete as article creator. However, am open to the alternatives above, if they are pursued. Safiel (talk) 17:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- 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.