Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr Paul Knapman


 * 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   delete. I think we need actual sources but this can come back as soon as someone finds some. Spartaz Humbug! 03:03, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Dr Paul Knapman

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable person. As the coroner in London, Knapman's name appears in many news articles, but the coverage is not about Knapman, but rather about the cases in which he was involved. The only notable coverage about Knapman himself involves an incident in which the coroner's office (and hence Knapman himself) were questioned about the unauthorized removal and subsequent loss of the hands of the victims of the Marchioness disaster. Since this is a relatively minor blip in the overall coverage of that disaster, WP:BLP1E would come into effect. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC) I am copying below a note that was placed on the article's talk page by its creator. The user is new to Wikipedia and probably didn't know where to put his comments. --MelanieN (talk) 23:27, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment from talk page: Dear All

If anyone can help me with this article it is my first time. It would appear I am not correctly following the guidelines, as the editors are saying that Dr Paul Knapman is not notable.

Dr Knapman is an expert, published author,that is another notable fact. The articles relating to inquests are highly significant, as Dr. Knapman is presiding over them and is responsible for the process that decides on the cause of death - in his case, over 85,000 deaths have been overseen and ruled upon. As a Coroner, Dr. Knapman also makes significant recommendations, such as the ones made to the Home secretary, Theresa May regarding the shooting of the barrister, Mark Saundrs by members of the Metroploitan Police - BBC News. As a Deputy Lord Lieutenent of Greater London he fulfills duties relating to the monarchy and is entitled to display the letters DL after his name. wiki ino on [|Dep Lord Lieutenants] here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deputy_Lieutenant

He also has an entry in Debrett's, which has been a noted source of recognising 'people of significance' for over two centuries. His notable status is very similar to that of judges that preside over signiicant cases (Many judges are featured on Wikipedia)

Any help getting this prominant individual on wikipedia would be most appreciated.

WebManAtTheNetShop (talk) 12:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC)WebManAtTheNetShopWebManAtTheNetShop (talk) 12:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment Probable delete but I'm torn on this one. As noted by Nominator, there are a lot of news hits that are simply quoting him about a case; that does not amount to "significant coverage". Then there are his publications at Google Scholar, probably not enough or heavily enough cited to qualify him under WP:ACADEMIC. On the other hand (and Nominator noted this too), he himself has been the subject of some news coverage of a negative type, for example a BBC article about a case where he was criticized for unnecessarily removing the hands of victims of a disaster, and criticism in the House of Commons for that and other actions including a suggestion that he be fired. These are significant issues, but I feel that the BBC report may be a case of WP:ONEEVENT and the Parliamentary commentary is not a WP:Reliable Source in the usual sense. --MelanieN (talk) 23:37, 9 January 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.