290:
per Mazca. The source added by DGG wasn't enough to convince me (proof that something happened isn't necessarily proof that it warrants coverage) but the sources just added persuade me that this was a significant case. I still think the negative BLP statements sourced solely to
265:, a friendly IP address now seems to have quietly added masses of reliable-source references to the article. Notability and verifiability no longer appear to be in question; the article is now quite well sourced. ~
164:
I added a reference to the
Guardian, that took me all of 30 seconds to find in Google News Archive. from it's nature, there are clearly more. Probably will pass BLP as a major national story in the UK.
121:
17:
88:
83:
92:
75:
325:
36:
226:
224:
324:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
222:
292:
252:
133:
196:
310:
281:
254:
228:
200:
176:
155:
57:
303:
148:
215:
245:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
192:
79:
129:
298:
143:
140:
referenced, I'd question whether there is anything notable about this particular case. –
53:
212:
172:
109:
71:
63:
266:
238:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
186:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
49:
167:
318:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
132:
violation as it's possible to get (the sole reference is to
136:, which I'd venture isn't a reliable source). Even if it
116:
105:
101:
97:
243:
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
191:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
328:). No further edits should be made to this page.
128:Without references, this is about as blatant a
8:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
1:
345:
229:06:10, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
201:00:02, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
177:23:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
156:22:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
321:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
311:12:17, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
282:11:03, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
255:00:17, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
58:10:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
295:need to go, though. –
44:The result was
309:
257:
203:
336:
323:
306:
301:
296:
279:
248:
242:
240:
220:
190:
188:
151:
146:
119:
113:
95:
34:
344:
343:
339:
338:
337:
335:
334:
333:
332:
326:deletion review
319:
304:
299:
267:
246:
236:
216:
184:
149:
144:
115:
86:
70:
67:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
342:
340:
331:
330:
314:
313:
284:
259:
258:
241:
233:
232:
231:
205:
204:
189:
181:
180:
179:
126:
125:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
341:
329:
327:
322:
316:
315:
312:
308:
307:
302:
294:
289:
285:
283:
280:
278:
274:
270:
264:
261:
260:
256:
253:
250:
249:
239:
235:
234:
230:
227:
225:
223:
221:
219:
218:Staffwaterboy
214:
211:Doesn't meet
210:
207:
206:
202:
198:
194:
187:
183:
182:
178:
174:
170:
169:
163:
160:
159:
158:
157:
154:
153:
152:
147:
139:
135:
131:
123:
118:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
320:
317:
297:
287:
276:
272:
268:
262:
247:Juliancolton
244:
237:
217:
208:
185:
166:
161:
142:
141:
137:
127:
45:
43:
31:
28:
193:Ron Ritzman
72:Eaton Green
64:Eaton Green
293:Black Flag
286:Change to
134:Black Flag
122:View log
89:protect
84:history
209:Delete
130:WP:BLP
117:delete
93:delete
305:scent
300:iride
150:scent
145:iride
120:) – (
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
288:Keep
263:Keep
213:wp:n
197:talk
173:talk
162:Keep
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
54:talk
50:Fram
46:Keep
168:DGG
251:|
199:)
175:)
138:is
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
56:)
48:.
277:a
275:c
273:z
271:a
269:m
195:(
171:(
124:)
114:(
112:)
74:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.