166:: It's always hard to determine if sources are reliable when a conspiracy theory is concerned, but the nomination doesn't say anything about the writers. If they are indeed investigative journalists of note, the book deserves a mention too. Can you expand on the authors? -
181:
These books sell like hotcakes, which in itself, may be notable, but the journalists themselves are not in the mainstream media, and are virtually unknown. If the article is kept, it needs additional sources and work, otherwise
207:. I imagine a conspiracy theory page will eventually be spun off. If there were an individual article about every JFK conspiracy book that had been written in the past 45 years, we'd be at 2,100,000 by now.
123:
96:
91:
100:
258:
unfortunately this type of book does seem to sell, mind you there are a whole raft of these Diana conspiracy books. Maybe they could be lumped together in a list.
83:
135:
17:
204:
267:
250:
233:
216:
195:
173:
157:
65:
152:
63:
285:
87:
36:
224:
Guys, the article is about the book, not the actual theory. On top of that, it's relatively well sourced for a stub.
79:
71:
284:
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
171:
130:
There is an insufficient amount of independent reliable source material for this topic. The topic is not
191:
229:
212:
167:
146:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
187:
56:
263:
225:
246:
208:
131:
139:
117:
49:
259:
242:
205:
Death of Diana, Princess of Wales #Conspiracy theories and
Operation Paget
278:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
113:
109:
105:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
288:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
241:- per Scope creep and GlassCobra. -
24:
1:
268:22:09, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
251:07:47, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
234:01:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
217:18:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
196:16:36, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
174:14:37, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
158:14:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
66:10:18, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
80:Princess Diana: The Evidence
72:Princess Diana: The Evidence
48:, no consensus to delete. ~
305:
281:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
296:
283:
155:
149:
144:
121:
103:
61:
54:
34:
304:
303:
299:
298:
297:
295:
294:
293:
292:
286:deletion review
279:
153:
147:
140:
94:
78:
75:
57:
50:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
302:
300:
291:
290:
273:
271:
270:
256:Very Weak Keep
253:
236:
219:
198:
176:
128:
127:
74:
69:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
301:
289:
287:
282:
276:
275:
274:
269:
265:
261:
257:
254:
252:
248:
244:
240:
237:
235:
232:
231:
227:
223:
220:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
199:
197:
193:
189:
185:
180:
177:
175:
172:
169:
165:
162:
161:
160:
159:
156:
150:
145:
143:
137:
133:
125:
119:
115:
111:
107:
102:
98:
93:
89:
85:
81:
77:
76:
73:
70:
68:
67:
64:
62:
60:
55:
53:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
280:
277:
272:
255:
238:
228:
221:
200:
183:
178:
163:
141:
129:
58:
51:
45:
43:
31:
28:
188:scope_creep
134:. Also see
239:Weak keep
209:Mandsford
179:Weak Keep
142:Jreferee
124:View log
164:Comment
136:WP:COIN
132:notable
97:protect
92:history
184:delete
101:delete
260:RMHED
230:Cobra
226:Glass
203:with
201:Merge
138:. --
118:views
110:watch
106:links
16:<
264:talk
247:talk
243:jc37
222:Keep
213:talk
192:talk
114:logs
88:talk
84:edit
52:Eliz
46:keep
168:Mgm
122:– (
266:)
249:)
215:)
194:)
186:.
116:|
112:|
108:|
104:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
59:81
262:(
245:(
211:(
190:(
170:|
154:c
151:/
148:t
126:)
120:)
82:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.