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. Sandstein 07:25, 24 April 2017 (UTC)reply
no permanent interest. Just a curiosity. NOT NEWS, NOT TABLOID. significant BLP problems DGG (
talk ) 05:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete, a minor curiosity as nom says, ideal for tabloids, social media and gossip sites but not for an encyclopedia.
Chiswick Chap (
talk) 10:34, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete This falls under not news. I also think the article is way to detailed, and makes too many mentions of Wikipedia. This might have a place in a broad scholarly article on the uses and misuses of Wikipedia, but there is just not enough here to justify an article on the incident itself.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 03:26, 17 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete fame-seeking imposter, petty criminal lacks significant claim to notability, lacks sufficient sourcing to support notability.
E.M.Gregory (
talk) 12:04, 21 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete, I agree with all comments above.
MartinJones (
talk) 18:04, 22 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete - No significant reliable coverage.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 05:40, 23 April 2017 (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.