Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Carpenter

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 keep. I'm sure the nomination was done in good faith but there are no grounds for this article to be deleted. —Moondyne 14:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Alan Carpenter

Alan Carpenter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

This article should be deleted per WP:BLP as it does not have any citations, and could potentially be libelous. In WP:BLP, admins are directed to delete this kind of article without discussion (I'm not an admin). Auroranorth 13:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

• Keep The article seems unobjectionable to me, and presumably the facts of his career are easily verified? StuartDouglas 13:15, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - just because a person is notable, it isn't any reason to disregard WP:BLP. Unless someone can massively overhaul the article with references, it has to go! The facts of his career are probably easily verified, but they haven't, have they? Auroranorth 13:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  • So remove any unreferenced comments that breach BLP. Cut the article down to a stub if you have to. But no, we're not going to delete the article on the current Premier of Western Australia. That's just a joke. And a bad one at that. Hesperian 13:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Its a biog and every statement is confirmed in the first two external links. It could do with some independent sources being added, but I doubt they'll be hard to find. WP:BLP says 'contentious' material must de deleted straight away. As the material is based on his two, official, biogs I fail to see where the contentious material is.Nuttah68 13:36, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
• WP:SNOWBALL speedy keep. He is the current Premier of Western Australia. Hesperian 13:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Obviously. The nominator can spray {{fact}} tags liberally over the article if he or she likes. --Aim Here 14:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep as this cant be serious and as per hesperian's comment Gnangarra 14:11, 2 March 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.