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. – Joe (talk) 14:52, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrongful imprisonment of Victor Nealon[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP GNG and BLp is violated Duostines (talk) 13:27, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable, see WP:CRIME. -- » Shadowowl | talk 13:36, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 13:44, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 13:44, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 13:44, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 13:44, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I'm not sure I'd say this is NCRIME - as the case is notable due to the lack of a crime being committed and the campaign to free this individual and the subsequent campaign (to present) to receive compensation (the original rape he was convicted for probably wouldn't have been notable without the wrongful conviction angle). In any event - this is a high profile wrongful conviction case, with national British coverage spanning for several years and well as coverage in some books - so it should pass NCRIME/GNG. I don't see how BLP is violated, and covering someone's clearly wrongful conviction (clearly) is probably better than not covering it.Icewhiz (talk) 22:55, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per ONGOING, WP:SIGCOV in national press over the course of the 5 years since the release of this wrongfully convicted man from prison.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:59, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This looks like a keep based on extended coverage (i.e. WP:GNG) but Duostines, could you explain what concern you have about BLP violations? I don't see any here. Mortee (talk) 02:35, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.