Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Colquhoun


 * 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 and erase the porno collection. --Luigi30 (Ta&lambda;k) 14:10, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Harry Colquhoun

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

There is nothing here to support any sort of notability of this individual. It's asserted, but certainly not supported by any sort of reference.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 08:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC) This is pathetic. The only reason why Ryulong is doing this is because we had an arguement last night and he banned me. Only yesterday he was working on the article. Please refer to this page which is his business partner. The magazine articles put the two of them together. You cant have one without the other. http://bgafd.co.uk/search/results.php search for Hazza on this page and you will see tons of reviews of his films raving on about him. If you have Ben Dover listed then you must have Harry as he is more famous in Europe. There I have started to add sources for you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Krome007 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC).
 * Delete unverified, notability not demonstrated. A pornographic film director isn't inherently notable anyway, unless there's evidence of coverage by third-party sources (e.g. film reviews). Walton monarchist89 09:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - sources have now been added verifying the awards won by Colquhoun. This may constitute adequate evidence of notability, although more sources are still needed, ideally. Walton monarchist89 15:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and close discussion. The page should stay. If you go through Harrys website www.relishxxx.com you can see how many awards they have won. Just go to www.bgafd.co.uk and see his rave reviews. The guys wedding was featured in Harpers magazine and he attended Harrow. More source evidence here http://www.relishxxx.com/relish.asp He is in business with someone who is in line to the thrown of Great Britain and is making porn flicks. I think that is reason enough.
 * Comment Sources, maybe? I mean independent links, not just a link to the guy's site. --N Shar 18:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Addhoc 10:19, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:N unless verified by the end of the AfD. I don't think it's likely to be. No vote. The references don't seem to be relevant, but I can't be sure, and I will leave this up to other users. --N Shar 18:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete no references.-MsHyde 18:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I've merged the three votes by the author.— Ryūlóng ( 竜 龍 ) 02:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable. JPG-GR 03:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - sources do not verify any claims made. Colqahoun is only mentioned once as Duncombe's business partner, and Relish won "best packaging", which has nothing overtly to do with the Colqahoun.  Moreover,  externals violate WP:EL. MSJapan 04:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 *  Weak keep there are no neutral sources establishing notability i.a.w. WP:BIO, and as long as that is the case this discussion will be opened over and over again Alf photoman 15:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - I would prefer to see the article expanded more than a little, and it needs much better citing with more than a single source, preferably, but the awards and such are, I feel, sufficient to establish notability. --Bill W. Smith, Jr. (talk/contribs) 15:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - until this article made properly with references verifiable —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fotografico (talk • contribs) 04:20, 9 February 2007 (UTC).
 * Delete No real reason to beleive he's notable -- febtalk 06:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete unless reliably sourced per above searches... Addhoc 10:19, 12 February 2007 (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.