Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solitaire Meissmer disappearance: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 08:22, 23 July 2007

Solitaire Meissmer disappearance

A not particularly remarkable case with two bad references: a memorial site and the family's website. User:Violetriga created this before being admonished by ArbCom for succumbing to tabloid journalism, which is what this article is. Guy (Help!) 07:08, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Hmm, I'm more than a bit disturbed by this nomination. It would have been much more appropriate to make it without referring to the individual editor's conduct. If you believe there's a problem with regards to an Arbitration decision, it would be far more appropriate to notify them instead of making it here. In any case [1] gets a number of results including several reputable papers. And the guardian reference existed before your nomination, so I wonder how you missed it? Mister.Manticore 07:29, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Firstly what you are saying about me above is a complete misrepresentation and a borderline personal attack - I ask that you change it. I can't see a particularly decent reason for your nomination other than "not particularly remarkable", which isn't right. The article details something that was massive across the news, not just tabloids. It was a massive missing-person operation and is a significant event. violet/riga (t) 08:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 A not particularly remarkable case with two bad references: a memorial site and the family's website. [[User:Violetriga]] created this before being admonished by ArbCom for succumbing to tabloid journalism, which is what this article is. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 07:08, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''' Hmm, I'm more than a bit disturbed by this nomination.  It would have been much more appropriate to make it without referring to the individual editor's conduct.  If you believe there's a problem with regards to an Arbitration decision, it would be far more appropriate to notify them instead of making it here.  In any case [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?hl=en&ned=us&q=Solitaire+Meissmer&ie=UTF-8] gets a number of results including several reputable papers.  And the guardian reference existed before your nomination, so I wonder how you missed it?  [[User:Mister.Manticore|Mister.Manticore]] 07:29, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
-*'''Keep'''.  Firstly what you are saying about me above is a complete misrepresentation and a borderline personal attack - I ask that you change it.  The articles details something that was massive across the news, not just tabloids.  It was a massive missing-person operation and is a significant event.  [[user:violetriga|violet/riga]] [[User_talk:violetriga|(t)]] 08:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
+*'''Keep'''.  Firstly what you are saying about me above is a complete misrepresentation and a borderline personal attack - I ask that you change it.  I can't see a particularly decent reason for your nomination other than "not particularly remarkable", which isn't right.  The article details something that was massive across the news, not just tabloids.  It was a massive missing-person operation and is a significant event.  [[user:violetriga|violet/riga]] [[User_talk:violetriga|(t)]] 08:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)