Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Webb (anti-censorship campaigner)


 * 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. The sourcing in the article could stand to be beefed up, though. Deor (talk) 12:41, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

David Webb (anti-censorship campaigner)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested PROD. Reason was "Does not pass WP:BIO and the references do not assist" Fiddle   Faddle  17:44, 3 August 2014 (UTC)


 * The suggestion that this article be deleted is absurd; it easily meets all the relevant criteria. I suggest the person who proposed its deletion does his homework.


 * A Baron — Preceding unsigned comment added by VennerRoad (talk • contribs) 18:14, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Tutelary (talk) 18:33, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Tutelary (talk) 18:33, 3 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Don't censor. WP:NOT censored. There are a few internet-based references (not included in the article), and it isn't a BLP. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Article ultimately fails WP:GNG in its present state, and the research for reliable sources did not seem promising. Tutelary (talk) 18:51, 3 August 2014 (UTC) It has been brought to my attention that this person is indeed notable, but due to the lacking sourcing due to the figure that there was no Internet, there may not be sources present in article. Change vote to Keep. Tutelary (talk) 14:27, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Nothing strongly suggests a lack of notability. There seems to be a substantial archive of materials at http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/ncropa/ncropa_site_index.html - I'm not saying these could be usable on Wikipedia - but their quantity does suggest the organisation had some notability and influence at the time it was active, which should make us cautious about deleting. This was all pre-internet, so a lack of online references is not an important indication of lack of notability. There is no Wikipedia article on the organisation National Campaign for the Reform of the Obscene Publications Acts so maybe an alternative is to rename the article to that title and expand it. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:34, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not set in my viewpoint to delete, so if you can come up with sources--even offline ones to verify notability, I'll change my !vote. Tutelary (talk) 19:38, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
 * He has an imdb entry http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0916079/ with 82 credits to his name. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Imdb isn't a reliable source for BLPs and cannot be used to demonstrate notability, but it gives me a starting point to look over and attempt to find reliable sources denoting the movies and shows he's been in. Tutelary (talk) 21:21, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Erm, remember he's dead - so is not a BLP. I'd argue that imdb content can indicate notability, it just can't be used as a source. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 01:26, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Changed my !vote. Tutelary (talk) 14:27, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Can this be used? http://www.seangabb.co.uk/?q=node/645 The info in it about the British Board of Film Censorship being denied its longstanding protecting a 'vulnerable minority' (i.e. the working class, or women) from seeing things excuse for censorship thanks to the European Convention on Human Rights and its concept of proportionality seems to be an extremely important change to the application of laws in Britian. And if David Webb was responsible for initiating the events that led to that change, as the obituary suggests, that fact alone means he is notable. Was this perhaps even the first time the concept was tested in Britain? The very same human rights concept of proportionality is the one that might get Israel's leaders/war criminals brought to justice.Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 01:42, 4 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - Was involved in an anti-censorship campaign and, according to unreferenced and not necessarily reliable sources, appeared in a number of minor roles that do not meet the criteria of WP:NACTOR.--Rpclod (talk) 21:48, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

David Webb founded NCROPA, not was involved with. The NCROPA papers are held by Warwick University: http://dscalm.warwick.ac.uk/DServe/dserve.exe?dsqIni=DServeadv.ini&dsqApp=Archive&dsqCmd=Show.tcl&dsqDb=Catalog&dsqPos=0&dsqSearch=((text)%3D%27ncropa%27)

As for "minor" acting rolls, his touring credits include "The Odd Couple" and "The Water Gipsies". — Preceding unsigned comment added by VennerRoad (talk • contribs) 23:12, 3 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. He is notable enough for NCROPA per above, but just have a look at all the roles he played in television. Wnt (talk) 03:58, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Founded what was a fairly significant organisation in its day. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:00, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep as Necrothesp TheFrontDeskMust (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:14, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment This is not the first article I have seen that had fewer sources than desirable but was obviously notable to living Wikipedians. Wikipedia must decide whether it is right to be covering only everything after the internet age fully, and lose everything within the memory of people born between 1930 and 1980. The systemic bias of the AfD process, which despite a veil of blissful belief to the contrary is heavily weighted towards voting, has been enough to keep many valuable, vulnerable articles alive, but it will not always be so. Anarchangel (talk) 23:21, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
 * David Webb is also in the category of people who are famous for each of several achievements in life; there should be provision that additional notability should be accrued in this way, and there is none in policy so far. We have, BLP:1E; we should have its converse, a BLP:MANYEVENTS too. Anarchangel (talk) 23:21, 10 August 2014 (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.