Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wayne crookes

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 of the debate was Delete --Cyde↔Weys 13:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wayne crookes

Not notable at all - POV - low google manchesterstudent 22:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy delete as per CSD A7: nn person. Recommend nominator to Be Bold and use {{db-bio}} more often. --Evan Seeds (talk) 22:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Google doesn't tell the whole story. This guy has apparently several lawyers poring over the net looking for mention of himself. He's quite notable for the sheer number of lawsuits he's promised against his critics. One of the ones he actually filed, "Crookes v. openpolitics.ca", has very substantial implications for the use of wiki to debate politics in Canada, and will likely become a Canadian Charter of Rights case soon. There was an article in the Province about him recently outlining this controversy. Crekshin
• Delete, while there are ongoing problems with the candidate selection process within the Green Party in BC, that have occasionally made the news, this small player in those problems isn't notable enough (yet) for a page. --Kickstart70-T-C 01:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
  • That's not the controversy he's primarily been involved in. It's the Green Party of Canada incidents that are notable. The links to this page (properly named) name him in a number of controversies that got substantial national press, though it was the people he put in place, not he himself, that was generally named in the news. Crekshin
• Speedy delete per Evan Seeds. DVD+ R/W 01:34, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
  • See above.
• Keep. Obviously the article needs to be renamed but the material is verifiable, and the people above clearly have not done their research, not even looking for the back links or the stories in the Canadian press. As the primary funder of the GP of C in 2004, Crookes is very hard to separate from the rise of that party to national prominence. In 2001 he was notable in the rise of the GP of BC too. Both of these parties have had a substantial impact on politics, if only by splitting votes. There must be some consideration also for people who actively try to suppress mention of themselves, which is notable in itself.Crekshin

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.