User talk:Triptych
The article NextBus has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- No assertion of notability. Fails WP:ORG. Has no (ZERO) reliable sources.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 15:57, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article NextBus is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NextBus until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 00:12, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Wikipediocracy and Alexander Montagu, 13th Duke of Manchester
[edit]Hi, are you the same Triptych @ Wikipediocracy? [1]
"he has been accused of [bigamy]" refers to the Telegraph article http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/8657033/The-bigamist-Duke-and-his-three-wives.html that was already a ref on the article under discussion. I particularly like this piece in The Lady http://www.lady.co.uk/people/features/1188-is-this-the-world-s-naughtiest-aristocrat – if The Lady is after you then you've been a very naughty aristo indeed. If you accept the Daily Mail as a source then we also have http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2017091/Dukes-Manchester-Fraudsters-drug-addicts-jailbirds-shaming-aristocracy.html and http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2016558/Duke-Manchesters-children-CAN-inherit-fortune-despite-bigamous-marriage.html
Note that I'm very careful with my wording. I referred to him as a "convicted fraudster and bigamist" (both of which he is, with sources up to BLP) and not (as mis-quoted on Wikipediocracy) as a "convicted bigamist and fraudster". Although his marriage was ruled bigamous (although this was also judged to not affect the inheritance), I'm unaware of him being charged with the offence of bigamy, let alone convicted of it.
There are a vast range of other allegations, including the speargun assault. I don't consider these particularly credible and they're certainly not sourced from anywhere reliable enough to use per BLP. Clearly he finds all of these embarrassing (yet can't stop bringing them up), to the point where he had his Wikipediocracy buddies delete this article and even delete the discussion of this article. An article that met notability and didn't have anything in it (un-vandalised versions) that wasn't supported by RS sources. He obviously doesn't like me, he certainly over-estimates how much interest I take in him, but his hard-done-by sob stories are something he brought on himself. If he doesn't like an uncomplimentary bio calling him a convicted fraudster, then he (like his father, the 12th Duke) shouldn't commit fraud or have himself convicted of it! Andy Dingley (talk) 23:54, 29 October 2013 (UTC)