Tracey Temple s highly intimate intrusive and personal comments about Prescott have been widely reproduced by bloggers and sections of the media because of their titillation value and unfortunately titillation sells despite being very unpleasant for the victim Perhaps his behaviour deserved these intimate revelations but that is not for Wikipedia to judge Bloggers tabloids and columnists are as we all know highly partial I do not see how a Wikipedia biography can reproduce such intimate revelations without breaching the spirit of its neutrality Btw whether the Winterton allegations are appropriate is open to question reproduction of media speculation about unverifiable allegations does not seem to be within Wikipedia s biography guidelines But others can decide whether or not to delete these