| 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 sourced must 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Needs deleting
editThe NPOV mockery of the Guardian/Observer and the near-total lack of content in the article (it mainly consists of a single quote from NJ's blog) make it an obvious candidate for speedy deletion. Someone who can, take care of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.181.24 (talk) 13:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I disagree
editI think the line in reference to the Guardian/Observer should be removed, and the "The Evil Poor" entry should be cited. However, I see no reason to delete the entire article, and your suggestion of a speedy deletion candidate is entirely unjustified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.125.6.101 (talk) 18:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Now that much more is known about the disgraceful conduct of News International's staff at the times via the Leveson inquiry, this article seems somewhat out of date. What is Wikipedia policy with regard to peripheral articles that 'dance' round an item of conderable interest. Is the night jack scandal subsidiary article to an underlying matter, including Grant, Dowler, Diamond et al or should it be chronicled here?Drg40 (talk) 10:04, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Evil Poor
editThis quote from one of his winning entries has had the [citation needed] tag added, the original URL for this entry was http://nightjack.wordpress.com/2008/04/29/the-evil-poor/ - however this has been deleted. There are solid references to the link, including this quote here and here, I'm not sure they're worthy sources. For now they'll have to do.
Rodent Enthuasiast?
editAn IP (who has made good faith edits in the past) added that Horton is a "rodent enthuasiast". I do not know enough about the topic to tell if this is true to just plain vandalism. Dubious tags have been applied. Can anyone provide me with information to confirm this, or is it just vandalism? -Marechal Ney (talk) 16:17, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Importance
editI've been led to believe this guy and his blog were somehow important. For example this [1] says the blog was "valuable and entertaining". The article so explain the importance. Kotz (talk) 06:29, 22 September 2012 (UTC)