Talk:Robert Courts

Objection to deletion
Courts passes WP:GNG, as his political activities have garnered significant press coverage. i.e.: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/22/robert-courts-chosen-tory-candidate-david-cameron-constituency http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/22/new-conservative-candidate-for-david-camerons-witney-seat-reveal/ http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/barrister-robert-courts-will-fight-witney-by-election-conservatives-1582890 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3825089/Looking-new-material-publishers-dismiss-book-proposal-bland-David-Cameron-gets-election-trail-successor.html

Beyond that, let's pause and be pragmatic here. Hell will freeze over and pigs will fly to the moon before the Conservatives lose Witney. There is really no plausible outcome to the by-election other than Courts being elected; anyone with even the slightest passing knowledge of politics will tell you that you can't overturn a 43% majority without an absolute miracle. Especially given that the PROD is set to take effect on the 20th, the date of the by-election, there is really no point in letting the page be deleted and then have to be recreated again when he wins. Specto73 (talk) 20:35, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:52, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Official Portrait of Robert Courts MP.jpg

Re: Russian intereference
, I am going to trim down the section on Russian interference. According to our policy on biographies of living persons, we must not give disproportionate space to particular viewpoints and beware of claims that rely on guilt by association. Such long-winded descriptions of the Chernukhins' identities and histories of their transactions do not strictly relate to Robert Courts. Current prose fails Wikipedia's policy on neutral point of view and balance, by giving large amounts of highly detailed information about the Chernukhins' (and, by association, Courts's) supposed nefariousness; this kind of writing slants the article heavily even if every word that is written is true. We must never imply guilt by association on Wikipedia. If you believe I am mistaken, please ping me here. Kind regards, Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI converse &#124; fings wot i hav dun 16:47, 24 May 2021 (UTC)