Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Randy S. Grossman

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Randy S. Grossman}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Randy S. Grossman}})

Non-notable Federal lawyer; article reads like a resume. Nothing found making this individual any more notable than others in his position. Oaktree b (talk) 15:36, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 15:36, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:35, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Keep - both his predecessor Robert S. Brewer Jr. and his nominated replacement Tara McGrath have articles. There is enough sourcing coverage to support notability. - Indefensible (talk) 23:55, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:46, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

• Delete I found some announcements from when he was appointed, but they are brief and they all say the same things - probably provided by a PR source. Other than that, his name appears in newspaper articles, sometimes including a quote, but these are all just normal statements when a person holds such an office. The only thing that would mean a 'keep' for this would be if all persons holding this level of office are considered notable. I don't know of such a policy. Lamona (talk) 00:13, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
• :This office appears to generally be notable enough to qualify the incumbent, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Attorney#List_of_current_U.S._attorneys'_offices. This subject's nominated replacement also has an article which is up for AfD and looks to be temporarily sent back to draft per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Suggestion_for_judge_nominee_articles until she is confirmed, but for this AfD we are concerned with the current incumbent who already holds that office. - Indefensible (talk) 07:37, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
• Delete Fails WP:SIGCOV. No indications of being notable. Fails WP:BIO. The fact the somebody of the same rank and position have an article doesn't count. Articles are in their own enclosed state. They must have coverage to satisfy WP:V. Even the Google CSE search find nothing in reliable sources. There is nothing. scope_creep^Talk 11:49, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
• Delete This is yet another example of a article being created beacause of WP:ILIKEIT. Subject does not meet WP:GNG and although I found numerous articles namedropping him, none have the needed WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun (talk) 22:16, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.