Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Torbett


 * 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 Speedy keep as a result of withdrawal of nomination with no support.

Capitalistroadster 02:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Jim Torbett
Jim Torbett doesn't have good Google results to warrant an entry here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cola4 (talk • contribs) 20:33, 5 July 2006
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. (Liberatore, 2006). 12:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

style="color: rgb(255, 10, 0);"> Humphreys SPEAK TO MEABOUTTHE THINGS I MESSED UP 15:16, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, notability is clearly asserted by article and verified by reputable sources. Seb Patrick 12:53, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as notable and readily verifiable. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:24, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, even without doing a google search the BBC and Guardian articles are enough. Stu   ’Bout ye!  14:58, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Yeah - the external links make him pas WP:BIO David <span
 * Keep, seems notable enough per BBC and Guardian articles. --Core des at talk. o.o;; 19:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I've decided that the result should be keep as no one wants it to go.


 * 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.