![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
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: | |||||||
|
I'm concerned this article may be treading on very thin ice. We are told of police involvement: feelings are running high; and since this is a biography of a living person, there may be a risk of infringing libel laws and Wikipedia's policy ( Wikipedia: Biographies of living persons ). Any views? Should the article be referred to an administrator? SkyeWaye ( talk) 15:52, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
At the moment everything said has been carefully referenced, and is careful to be clear that it is restating information reported elsewhere rather than actually making any allegations. The article is balanced and includes all the subject's reported statements about the matters raised. I don't see any problems as long as people continue taking care to maintain this. Barrybounce ( talk) 17:09, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
One thing I would also suggest is that even though the article was initially created by his PR agency, he seems to be getting more notable by the day. The article is no longer un-referenced and there is a lot of secondary reporting of him and matters relating to his business. He has also now launched two airlines that have quickly failed. I think his history is now sufficiently interesting to be worthy of being recorded! Barrybounce ( talk) 17:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Removed the flag. As long as this article is properly maintained, it shouldn't be an issue. People are definitely upset about the situation, but this article appears to be well-sourced for the most part. Should it become less than neutral again in the future, I'm sure whoever flagged it the first time will restate their concerns. For now, looks legit! Truthsayer202 ( talk) 00:50, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks Barrybounce & Truthsayer202 for sharing your views: much appreciated SkyeWaye ( talk) 20:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
has acquired a reputation in Britain and more widely for his interests in the aviation industry. anybody know what that actually means! Perhaps should be reworded to something more factual like: .. an airline entrepreneur and businessman who has been involved in a number of start-up airlines. MilborneOne ( talk) 09:40, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Someone keeps trying to remove some of the less flattering statements about Martin Halstead. If it is true that the fraud case has been dropped, you need to find a newspaper article or police press release to support it. I'm pretty sure the Oxford Mail would cover it if it was true. Then you can add a section saying the case has been dropped, but you can't delete the bits saying it was started. Jonbryce ( talk) 14:51, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Firstly, whatever happens, the company director thing needs removing. Being a board member of a multinational is one thing, being a company director... frankly if you haven't been a company director by age 30, and you have any private sector ambitions at all, you are, to misquote a misquote of thatcher, destined to be taking the bus all your life.
Secondly, while BLP of course applies, this guy's note is basically for being a con man. It isn't a violation to point that out in the opening paragraph. But I invite your thoughts before I edit it again. Egg Centri c 15:17, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
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: | |||||||
|
I'm concerned this article may be treading on very thin ice. We are told of police involvement: feelings are running high; and since this is a biography of a living person, there may be a risk of infringing libel laws and Wikipedia's policy ( Wikipedia: Biographies of living persons ). Any views? Should the article be referred to an administrator? SkyeWaye ( talk) 15:52, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
At the moment everything said has been carefully referenced, and is careful to be clear that it is restating information reported elsewhere rather than actually making any allegations. The article is balanced and includes all the subject's reported statements about the matters raised. I don't see any problems as long as people continue taking care to maintain this. Barrybounce ( talk) 17:09, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
One thing I would also suggest is that even though the article was initially created by his PR agency, he seems to be getting more notable by the day. The article is no longer un-referenced and there is a lot of secondary reporting of him and matters relating to his business. He has also now launched two airlines that have quickly failed. I think his history is now sufficiently interesting to be worthy of being recorded! Barrybounce ( talk) 17:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Removed the flag. As long as this article is properly maintained, it shouldn't be an issue. People are definitely upset about the situation, but this article appears to be well-sourced for the most part. Should it become less than neutral again in the future, I'm sure whoever flagged it the first time will restate their concerns. For now, looks legit! Truthsayer202 ( talk) 00:50, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks Barrybounce & Truthsayer202 for sharing your views: much appreciated SkyeWaye ( talk) 20:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
has acquired a reputation in Britain and more widely for his interests in the aviation industry. anybody know what that actually means! Perhaps should be reworded to something more factual like: .. an airline entrepreneur and businessman who has been involved in a number of start-up airlines. MilborneOne ( talk) 09:40, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Someone keeps trying to remove some of the less flattering statements about Martin Halstead. If it is true that the fraud case has been dropped, you need to find a newspaper article or police press release to support it. I'm pretty sure the Oxford Mail would cover it if it was true. Then you can add a section saying the case has been dropped, but you can't delete the bits saying it was started. Jonbryce ( talk) 14:51, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Firstly, whatever happens, the company director thing needs removing. Being a board member of a multinational is one thing, being a company director... frankly if you haven't been a company director by age 30, and you have any private sector ambitions at all, you are, to misquote a misquote of thatcher, destined to be taking the bus all your life.
Secondly, while BLP of course applies, this guy's note is basically for being a con man. It isn't a violation to point that out in the opening paragraph. But I invite your thoughts before I edit it again. Egg Centri c 15:17, 4 February 2012 (UTC)