Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Deer


 * 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 of the debate was keep. Flowerparty ☀ 03:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Brian Deer
Not notable in any way, only acheived notoriety by leading the media smear campaign against Andrew Wakefield. --john 05:05, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Have you followed the convention of notifiying the editors who have worked on that article?  Midgley 19:12, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
 * This AFD appears to be orphaned anyway through failure to follow the proper procedure. Tearlach 22:18, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. His work for CND is somewhat notable, being the first social affairs correspondent in the UK is notable in that the first of anything is significant.  In the vaccine area, his investigative reporting of the DPT scare is significant, not least beucase it helps people see the same tactics and  exploitation being made of newer vaccines.  Far from smearing Dr Wakefield, who is another topic, the media have uncritically covered his speculations to a greater extent than they merit.  Midgley 19:12, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable as an investigative reporter.  Andrew73 20:32, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - the article Brian Deer asserts notability. He won Specialist Reporter of the Year. Tearlach 22:18, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clearly notable; if we keep Dan Olmsted we keep Brian Deer. Also: has other achievements, such as exposing toxicity of the commonly prescribed antibiotic co-trimoxazole. JFW | T@lk  21:36, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable achievements demonstrated in article.  There are vanity pages out there which are far more worthy of speedy deletion noms. - Stevecov 13:23, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * This nomination was incomplete, listing now. - Liberatore(T) 16:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak keep; seems vaguely well-known but the award is minor and there's no independent biographical information. Melchoir 18:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep British Press Awards are the highest distinction in UK journalism 81.159.187.122
 * Keep notable. Anonymous_  _Anonymous  14:09, 14 June 2006 (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.