Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mette Marit’s controversial past

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 speedy delete as serious violations of WP:BLP and WP:POV. Bearian 19:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mette Marit’s controversial past

Mette Marit’s controversial past (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Irreparable WP:BLP violation. Wikipedia is not a tabloid newspaper. MER-C 13:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom and per WP:NOT - Myanw 13:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep but rename to something less tabloid-ish and clean-up. This was well-covered in the intl. news and merits its own article. JJL 14:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Unsourced gossip and possible violation of BLP. Plus, there's already an article on Mette Marit and any of this information should appear there, if sourced. Renee 14:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. The Mette Marit article already mentions some of this with due weight (although no sources). This is a POV fork that only mentions negative incidents and does not show why any of them are important. --Dhartung | Talk 15:22, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Looks like the Norwegian Fergie. No need for ANY article about "___'s controversial past" whether it's George W. Bush or Pope Benedict XVI or Tom Cruise. Mandsford 15:47, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, blatant violation of WP:BLP, should not be included in an encyclopedia. --Kyoko 16:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, POV fork. Punkmorten 17:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong delete per nom. Carter | Talk to me 18:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, extreme BLP violation, all of the necessary information can be properly sourced and included in her main article. Corvus cornix 20:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, unsalvageable. --John 22:05, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. --Sc straker 13:01, 17 October 2007 (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.