This article was nominated for deletion on 4 August 2024. The result of the discussion was keep.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
At this diffan IP has removed well-referenced details of the subject's crime and conviction, suggesting that they justify only one more sentence in the article. What sentence do you suggest, and what details would you leave out and why? Richard Keatinge (talk) 15:00, 18 January 2017 (UTC)Reply
I note that another editor has reinstated the details. Possibly, indeed, more details than are ideal for an encyclopaedic article. I propose to trim them. A bit. Richard Keatinge (talk) 13:53, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Skeleton infobox rv as per WP:MOS (Wikipedia:Manual of Style (infoboxes)): “The most important group to consider are the casual readers of Wikipedia, who will never do any significant editing. Infobox templates that contain many blank fields, question marks and unknowns present an unprofessional appearance, diminishing Wikipedia's reputation as a high-quality encyclopedia.” Quis separabit?03:55, 3 March 2018 (UTC)Reply