Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Albury

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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:06, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Albury

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

I really don't see anything notable about this. NintendoFan (Talk, Contribs) 00:32, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:CRIME and WP:GNG--Jeffrd10 (talk) 14:15, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 01:55, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Fourteen murders (if this is established) is a significant serial killer. Given the alleged events occured between 1970-1982 I am not surprised that there is little available on the internet, hence claims of failing GNG. A visit to a library would unearth plenty of source material, I am sure. A Trove search reveals some likely sources for a start -- Mattinbgn (talk) 02:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I have to agree with user Mattinbgn. significant serial killer. but the article itself needs a shape-up.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:36, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:15, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:15, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. The recent reasonably detailed newspaper articles would seem to meet "sustained coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources which persists beyond contemporaneous news coverage and devotes significant attention to the individual's role" part of WP:PERP. As stated above, further coverage is limited by the lack of internet sources from this period.Doctorhawkes (talk) 11:18, 27 February 2014 (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.