User talk:MikeUK27

A few comments by anonymous people on an internet discussion forum does not substantiate any claims. Neither is it likely to hold up in a court of law in the UK. Wikipedia does not approve of conveying libel or unverifiable material of a defamatory nature.

Mitcheldean (talk) 14:04, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

You say it is. I say it isn't libellous.

It will hold up in a Court if there are those who will testify to the veracity of these claims. And I'm sure there are plenty of people who will testify against Sobrany.

Please don't delete my own comments on my own User page. MikeUK27 (talk) 16:40, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Please sign comments to confirm authorship.

Mitcheldean (talk) 17:13, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I can assure you that Riaz Sobrany is the custodian of Dissident Congress. I have personally seen the following:

1. Business registration certificate.

2. Website domain name registration material.

3. PayPal registration material.

All of which displays Riaz Sobrany's home address.

Mitcheldean (talk) 17:14, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

You're the one who vandalised the Conservative Democratic Alliance entry last year. So your "assurances" mean diddly squat to me. MikeUK27 (talk) 17:56, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Dissident Congress / Populist Party (UK)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Dissident Congress / Populist Party (UK). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Dissident Congress / Populist Party (UK). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:11, 27 November 2009 (UTC)