Talk:The Accident Group/Archives/2013

Merger in of Mark Langford article
I propose that the article Mark Langford be merged into this article, because most of the details on the Mark Langford page replicate the details that are/should be here. Secondly, Langford only pass WP:notability thanks to his involvement with Accident Group. Rgds, - Trident13 18:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support 86.152.203.212 20:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * SupportBigturtle 03:03, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Mark Langford article now merged. I also moved the complete talk page text. Rgds, - Trident13

Accuracy
This article is misleading in serveral respects mainly that the accident group was nothing like a law firm but was an unregulated claims management company which at one point had 25% of the personal injury market and would refer cases to panel solicitors for a investigation fee which was held by the court to be a referral fee in 2003 which is one of the reasons for the failure of the company. In addition Mark Langford never sent the text message that was sent on instruction from the administrators. I worked for the accident for 3 years and am a solicitor in this area and parts of this article are incorrect in my view. this unsigned comments was added by 90.197.178.222

Mark Langford
News of his death is front page and headline news on BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6541131.stm). He was at the centre of a major business scandle (The Accident Group). Certainly not a SD candidate. --Darksun 16:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

A reasonable article that shouldn't be deleted
I don't think that this article should be deleted because it is mentioned in so many places. For example:

BBC News Telegraph Sky News Channel 4 Metro UK ITN UK This is Money UK Mirror UK --Jrad91 16:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree--being chairman of a business isn't noteworthy, but being chairman of a business that famously/scandalously let 2500 people go via text--that's noteworthy! The first thing I did when I read about it was to head to Wikipedia to see if we had any more info on him. Don't delete, expand. PoetrixViridis 17:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined
I've removed the speedy deletion tags as it's clear to me this article does not meet WP:CSD - there is definitely a claim to notability as he was at the centre of a business scandal that had widely been reported on long before his death by multiple non-trivial published works such as newspapers and magazines (e.g., ). The article may warrant merging into The Accident Group but that's a separate discussion. Qwghlm 17:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * yep, i'd have been tempted to call whoever added this speedy deletion tag a deliberate vandal if it wasn't so clear they were just way out of their depth. W guice 09:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Advertisement
This article had been rewritten to be an advertisement. Have reverted it to it's previous form. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.141.160 (talk) 17:04, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Removed words
I'm afraid I had to remove the text "TOSSER OF THE HIGHEST ORDER" from the foot of the article, although I personally fully agree with the sentiment.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.179.104.159 (talk) 12:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

Unsubstanciaed words
I have removed the "War Hero" part of the article, when refering to the OAP knocked down as it is not necessary or backed up.--92.237.108.49 (talk) 20:29, 23 October 2009 (UTC)