Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Lake (English Defence League)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. (non-admin closure) Steven Zhang  The clock is ticking....  01:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Alan Lake (English Defence League)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article does not meet WP:GNG Pass a Method   talk  06:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Multiple cites in 'academic' and newspaper sources. Mr Lake is a little publicity shy but that should not extend to deleting his Wikipedia article :-) Francium12  11:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep -- I'm satisfied that there are enough citations of reliable sources to show his notability. NotFromUtrecht (talk) 11:14, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep for reasons previously stated, and added notability that he is one of the few leaders of the EDL about whom much is known and that what is known shows him in a different mould to the usual EDL crowd. Emeraude (talk) 13:18, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect or merge to English Defence League. Coverage in independent reliable sources of this thing is purely about his connection tyo and activeties of that organisation. duffbeerforme (talk) 15:17, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep for reasons previously stated. Arctic hobo (talk) 16:36, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Enough coverage to meet GNG. Christopher Connor (talk) 21:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment In the case the article is kept, it should however change the title away from the awkwardly titled "Alan Lake (English Defence League)". I don't know what could be used instead, but perhaps some have suggestions. – Bellatores (t.) 23:06, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah it is a bit of an awkward title but I was struggling to think what else to use. Francium12  23:57, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 16:05, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Rename unless we are to identify all evil persons by the most evil organization they belong to as an epithet. Stick to his name, and balance the article. Collect (talk) 22:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately there is already an Alan Lake. Do you have any suggestions? The guy isn't notable for being a computer expert but is for funding a far-right movement Francium12  00:46, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Which is why disambiguation exists. If the person is only notable for being a funder of EDL, then it is clear he is insufficiently notable for a WP article.   Wikipedia does not have articles on every person funding a group, by the way.   By saying that he is not notable otherwise, you are giving a strong reason for deletion per BLP1E.  Cheers. Collect (talk) 11:38, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * By that logic Nick Griffin should be deleted as he is only notable due to his far-right activism as well. I'm not convinced. Anyway, if we disambiguate we could have this article as Alan Lake and the other as Alan Lake (actor). As the actor was only getting 80 hits a day prior to creation of this article I would go along with a disambiguation. Francium12  23:06, 5 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep, he notable for being one of the most prominent members of a notable group. No objection to a better title, but the current one is not wrong. Thryduulf (talk) 22:26, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Personally I don't support keeping this so called biography - its just an attack written by opponents of the person and hosted on the wikipedia servers. (any publicity is good publicity) If its kept it needs renaming improving. - as per collect Off2riorob (talk) 20:36, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * When I first started creating articles relating to the British far-right editors seemed to think i was a sympathiser in trying to get Stop Islamisation of Europe on the fornt page via DYK. Now I am opponent creating 'attack pages'. Is it possible to edit these topics without everyone thinking you have an agenda? Francium12  20:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.