Talk:Fiona Dolman

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 Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Deletion

Have asked User:Police,Mad,Jack to explain reasoning behind his G6 deletion request [1]. nancy ^(talk) 09:59, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken the liberty of removing the tag. I can't see that the criterion applies here, not even after reading the editor's response on your discussion page. Salvador Barley (talk) 10:51, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its a not very good article, it is poorly written. I question notability and references (by and large) have taken a holiday it appears. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 12:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And how does that fall under "Non-controversial maintenance, such as temporarily deleting a page to merge page histories, or performing uncontroversial page moves"? It seems to me that questionable notability isn't covered by the criterion you cited. --Salvador Barley (talk) 12:33, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my goodness, I didnt properly cover it in my criterion. Prison for me eh? Keep your page, despite it being all the things I have stated. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 12:46, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and please try to WP:Assume Good Faith your tone really is quite horrible. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 12:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't your faith I was questioning. --Salvador Barley (talk) 13:58, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your right, I was questioning yours. Drop the childish acts, dear me. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 14:01, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can see there's little point in continuing this discussion. Good day. Salvador Barley (talk) 14:09, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You think? Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 14:14, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]