- 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 delete. Although consensus appears to be for keep, we must discount those arguments that are either WP:ILIKEIT or based on non-existant policy. Let's be clear: notability is not transferrable. Simply being associated with notable people does not make one notable. When I looked at the content that had been removed, it was clear to me that (unless sourced), it was a massive violation of WP:BLP, and as such could not be included in this article. With sufficient time to source it, no one did. Therefore, my decision (which I expect to be controversial) is DELETE.. - Philippe 15:01, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally: A user has asked to userfy this article to attempt to improve it's sourcing. I have done so. - Philippe 17:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Darius Guppy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Unnotable person, BLP nightmare (ie almost no sources for serious accusations) and far from being nPOV appears to be an attack page. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:36, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No lasting notability ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 18:59, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep Seems to be a frivolous nomination since the subject is obviously notable and a reliable source is provided. Not that it matters, but we can expect him to be in the news again due to his association with Boris Johnson. And here are lots of sources, to prove it. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please contain your bad faith, this chap is unnotable and your claim this is a bad faith nomination is what in bad faith. Thanks, SqueakBox 15:21, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- KEEP - What is wrong with some wikipedians! This is obviously a notable page - if it is deficient in its content then improve it. It has a reference. Chendy (talk) 11:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- KEEP - Really, why is this even being consider for deletion? Ecoleetage (talk) 01:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Definitely Keep -- Guppy is admittedly a minor figure himself, but he figures prominently in the career of Boris Johnson, the addled buffoon who may well become the next Mayor of one of the world's largest cities, London. The fact that Johnson would entertain a plot by Guppy to nobble an inconvenient journalist says a great deal about both men. I lived through the whole Guppy Episode, so if it is only a matter of sources, I would rather provide them myself than see an essentially correct page censored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chad.staddon (talk • contribs) 18:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC) only edit of user[reply]
- Keep - This should be kept because of the subject's association with Boris Johnson and Mark Thatcher.Mostyn 15:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- Weak keep - it must (and definitely can) be sourced and improved, but it's lasting notability is a big question for me. In other words, this article is very likely a WP:ONEEVENT issue. BWH76 (talk) 12:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Very weak delete. Based on this article, it seems that Guppy's friends and relatives all pass WP:BIO but he has no apparent notability on his own. If this is kept, the article needs to be expanded and better source to demonstrate better his claims to fame. Being the best man at Earl Spencer is not enough; nor are simply being a friend of Mark Thatcher or being the son of a very notable zoologist. People who claim sufficient notability should ensure that the source(s) of the notability be included in the article.B.Wind (talk) 03:17, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The nominator has been removing relevant details from the article, in particular that the subject is a notorious criminal. Colonel Warden (talk) 08:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Unless notability rubs off from other people, I'm not seeing any claim in the article for his actual need to be in an encyclopedia. Shell babelfish 03:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Again, that is because the nominator has been taking such well-sourced material out. Since this is disrupting the AFD, I shall re-instate it.
- Keep - This should be kept because of the subject's association with Boris Johnson, who is running as Mayor for London in the UK, and Mark Thatcher. --Tomhannen (talk) 14:02, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.