Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sandy Mitchell


 * 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 JoshuaZ 20:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Sandy Mitchell

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Not really notable, fails WP:COATRACK. h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 10:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletions.   -- the wub  "?!"  10:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Saudi Arabia-related deletions.   -- the wub  "?!"  10:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The BBC, the Daily Telegraph , the Scotsman  and the Guardian   certainly think he's notable enough for articles on him.  He was interviewed on 'Hardtalk' on the BBC  as well as this BBC press release shows.  He also wrote a book about his experiences     This is an article from the New Statesman .  This  article is from the Washington Post.  These articles concentrate on Sandy Mitchell's story or interview him personally.  This is not WP:COATRACK.  He clearly is the subject of multiple independent reliable sources.  This one is from CBS  and there are many others.  Nick mallory 11:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep although this article could avoid COATRACKiness by being about two things -- the Rodway case itself, and the prosecution/persecution of Mitchell and several others, who are barely mentioned in his article. It isn't clear why he's the one who gets an article when they don't, and I don't think that they each deserve an article, unless he's acknowledged as a leader or spokesman or something. --Dhartung | Talk 05:19, 5 September 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.