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. Daniel (talk) 23:55, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Danny Lam Nguyen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A Trump nominee to the Superior Court of DC; the nomination has expired, as should this article for failing WP:JUDGE. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:49, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related page for the same reason:

John C. Truong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:38, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:38, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, nothing notable about his career at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 15:12, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per the very precise wording of Wikipedia:WikiProject United States courts and judges/Notability: "Nominees who withdraw, die, are withdrawn by the President prior to a vote on the nomination, or are returned by the United States Senate without being processed are not inherently notable". BD2412 T 15:18, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: per guidelines in WP:JUDGE. Marquardtika (talk) 15:32, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Why delete a nominee page that's still pending? Yes, his nomination was returned, but then resubmitted that same day. Source: https://www.congress.gov/nomination/117th-congress/16?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22Nguyen%22%5D%7D&s=1&r=1 I just hadn't had a chance to update that article to reflect this. Snickers2686 (talk) 15:47, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Per WP:USJUDGE, "Nominees whose nomination has not yet come to a vote are not inherently notable." Clarityfiend (talk) 21:07, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yet how many articles and created for nominees the minute they're announced? Now it's wrong? Snickers2686 (talk) 02:10, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong now, wrong then. Also an example of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:37, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So why not wait to see what happens to the nomination considering it's still pending before rushing to decide that it's irrelevant? Snickers2686 (talk) 17:35, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Want another reason? WP:CRYSTALBALL. Who knows if or when he/they will get the office. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:51, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How does that apply given their nomination is still pending? Snickers2686 (talk) 20:59, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why not make the article into a draft and then if he is confirmed and does achieve notability, the article can be recreated in article space? Would that be a good compromise here? Marquardtika (talk) 21:46, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Marquardtika: So by extension the Elizabeth Shapiro, Rahkel Bouchet, Mark Robbins, Carl Ezekiel Ross and Sharon Goodie articles would meet the same fate, right? Or do they have to be separately nominated for the same reason? What happens to the placeholders in the vacancy table then? Snickers2686 (talk) 01:34, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unless he is confirmed he will not be notable. We need to stop preemptively creating articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:42, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Why not wait until his nomination is either confirmed or withdrawn before deciding what should happen to the article? Snickers2686 (talk) 21:24, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Because that's not the way it's supposed to work. The notability horse comes before the article cart. Clarityfiend (talk) 18:40, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These two judges' nominations (Nguyen and Truong), along with a long list of other appointments/nominations, were withdrawn by Joe Biden's administration on February 4. The result of this AfD should also apply to the other 5 articles linked by Snickers2686 above. Natg 19 (talk) 23:04, 8 February 2021 (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.