Not sure how to find xfd page so just included the discussion link above. On what basis is the article believed to be from an author with an agenda? Everything in the article was thoroughly sourced. The reason most of the edits by the author were to that page was due to repeated undoing of vandalism by user Tesug. Invest-agator (talk) 23:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn and restore, regrettably because this should have been posted on the deleting admin's talk page before coming here. This was speedily deleted under A7 (db-corp). In my view, the content of the article and the number of sources cited - some of them from national news outlets - constitute a credible claim for notability. Questions of coat-racking and actual notability are matters for AfD. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn speedy deletion and list at AfD if so desired. As noted above, WP:CSD#A7 explicitly excludes "any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance." The "Controversies" section in the article gave the subject a "credible claim of significance or importance," so speedy deletion was inappropriate. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 20:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Overturn and relist for AfD Speedy deletion seemed to be improper and further discussion is required. ~AH1(TCU) 04:10, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
