From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

rm prod

user:SarekOfVulcan beat me to the edit. Daily Mail ref thinks she's notable, and they're always right. Her morality (and belly dancing past) has also been used as an attack on Murray's own credibility. Unjust, but noteworthy. Andy Dingley ( talk) 17:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC) reply

I would still dispute that she is notable: one article in a tabloid newspaper is not in my view "significant coverage" as defined by Wikipedia:Notability. In addition, her past being used to attack Murray's credibility is really an argument for a section on her in his article, not her own one. -- Jackyd101 ( talk) 17:38, 31 July 2009 (UTC) reply
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

rm prod

user:SarekOfVulcan beat me to the edit. Daily Mail ref thinks she's notable, and they're always right. Her morality (and belly dancing past) has also been used as an attack on Murray's own credibility. Unjust, but noteworthy. Andy Dingley ( talk) 17:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC) reply

I would still dispute that she is notable: one article in a tabloid newspaper is not in my view "significant coverage" as defined by Wikipedia:Notability. In addition, her past being used to attack Murray's credibility is really an argument for a section on her in his article, not her own one. -- Jackyd101 ( talk) 17:38, 31 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook