Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wayne Crookes: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:58, 13 July 2009

Wayne Crookes

This does not appear to meet our notability criteria for living subjects. I also fear it may give the impression that we're being a little pointy. Considering the asserted notability regards him suing Wikimedia, among others, for defamation posted about him on the internet, perhaps not the best idea to keep a biography on him, which leaves him open for more defamatory comments. لenna vecia 00:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - non notable, major BLP concerns, and completely inappropriate in any form. A check of websites and news databases provides nothing of value. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not noteworthy enough for inclusion. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The lawsuits do not make him notable, even if a few news sources wrote about it. Then any of his court cases turn out to be important, then we can have an article about that. --Apoc2400 (talk) 07:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - reeks of a personal vendetta by an IP address editor. Eric Barbour (talk) 07:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 * '''Delete''': Not noteworthy enough for inclusion. --[[User:MZMcBride|MZMcBride]] ([[User talk:MZMcBride|talk]]) 00:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 *'''Delete''' The lawsuits do not make him notable, even if a few news sources wrote about it. Then any of his court cases turn out to be important, then we can have an article about that. --[[User:Apoc2400|Apoc2400]] ([[User talk:Apoc2400|talk]]) 07:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' - reeks of a personal vendetta by an IP address editor. [[User:EricBarbour|Eric Barbour]] ([[User talk:EricBarbour|talk]]) 07:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)