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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:03, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew T. Heath[edit]

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

Page was created by a political candidate's publicist without acknowledged WP:COI after notice, many unsourced peacock claims, clear WP:PROMO use, WP:GNG questionable, issues with links in article. All this was addressed to the creator but she shows no signs of returning to address it after a week. If this stays it needs a serious rewrite so as not to be a campaign advert. JamesG5 (talk) 20:30, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:34, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:34, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete reads like a resume for a political candidate...fails simplest of WP:GNG standards.Cllgbksr (talk) 05:33, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Some state executive branch positions are notable, but I am not sure state budget director makes the list. The article lacks indepth sourcing. If Heath wins the appeals court election in 2018, he might be notable, but even that I am not sure of. State Supreme Court judges are notable, what lower US state court judges are notable is hard to say. I think in general lots of good sources focused on the judge, and not just rulings handed down by the judge would be key. Heath clearly is not notable, and even if he were this article is too biased to make it worth keeping.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:03, 4 August 2017 (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.