Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valerie Van Leer-Greenberg

: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. --BDD (talk) 22:51, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

=[[Valerie Van Leer-Greenberg]]=

:{{la|Valerie Van Leer-Greenberg}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Valerie_Van_Leer-Greenberg Stats])

:({{Find sources|Valerie Van Leer-Greenberg}})

Scant mention in reliable sources and no indication of notability in her profession. Might be notable later if the Ortega trial proceeds and Leer-Greenberg's defense recieves more media attention. Wkharrisjr (talk) 18:46, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:58, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:59, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:59, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Delete agree with nom WP:TOOSOON. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 21:23, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Delete per above and WP:HAMMER. She could become notable soon per my own standards, but there are not enough sources about her yet to create a decent jurist-stub. Bearian (talk) 23:00, 7 October 2013 (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.