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 - kept

Apparently not notable, since the first person to mention him onsite, the writer of the article, doesn't like him: if he were notable, one would expect an admirer to be the first. Google finds 24 instances of him online. A weak delete.Bill 19:40, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

He is a very notable figure in Australia and merits an article. The reason for the low Google rating is possibly that there are a number of variant spellings of his name. This article is crap but the solution to that is to rewrite it, not delete it. Adam 00:18, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I have now done some work on the article and it should be taken off this list. Adam 00:48, 7 Oct 2004 (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.