Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dante Arthurs

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 no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 01:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dante Arthurs

Non-notable persona (since when is every person accused of raping and murdering a child entitled to their own Wikipedia article?) Original author claims notability "because he may be Robert Venables." It has been proven conclusively that Arthurs is not Venables, and that he was born in Perth (as the doctor who delivered him has stated.) I elliot 14:17, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep, enough verifiable third party coverage and government involvement - as an individual and as a rumour. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 15:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep as he's certainly become rather infamous in Australia. I'm not a fan of having every sicko in the world given a page, but this bloke probably gets over the line. BigHaz 01:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
• Weak delete So far the most notable thing about this individual is that there is a rumor he is someone else. This might be worth a mention on the James Bulger page (Venables doesn't have one), but unless something comes of this new murder case, I just don't think it's notable.--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete* No notability as of yet, and given that his trial will not take place for some time, there is very little reliable comment that can be made. Dante Arthurs is not even notable should he be convicted of murder, as murders are fairly regular in the Perth area. I say 'strong', because it is evident to me that even while denying the James Bulger connection in the text, the author(s) are trying to promote it. That seems to be the central reason why this page has been posted. I also suspect that they are looking for a platform to publicise Dante Arthur's identity for its' own sake. This is a misuse of the open editing policy of the wiki. I note on the deletion discussion page that at least one of the authors is still defending this article on the basis of the same discredited rumour. If the rumour turns out to be true (extremely unlikely), the level of denial at government and police level will be the main point of interest. In the meantime, this article should be removed as swiftly as possible to defend Wikipedia's reputation. Centrepull 06:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep The camera hardly ever lies. The non-coincdental similarities between the two are there for all to see. The article should remain on this basis alone. These pictures were obtained from public, unbiased sources - the West Australian Newspaper and the BBC. Elpocoloco 14:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

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.