Talk:Rod Underhill (district attorney)
 | This page was proposed for deletion by Iridescent (talk · contribs) on 29 March 2022. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Contested deletion edit
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... 1. His predecessor was newsworthy.
2. His successor was newsworthy.
3. The office itself has repeatedly been in the news.
4. He himself was newsworthy for his decision to resign, as well as controversies with the judiciary that have national ramification.
5. Insufficient time to add the necessary information to the article to prove all this, this was proposed for speedy deletion less than two hours after it was created. Why can´t you just move it to "draft", instead of wasting my time and potentially driving away productive editors?
6. Ignorance is not an excuse for abdication the encyclopedic mission.
7. WP:Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia
Jaredscribe (talk) 04:55, 29 March 2022 (UTC)