Deletion of Sante Kimes

Comment: WP:NOTCENSORED and we will of course be meeting our policies of  with  through . It probably is "''irreconcilable''" with an attorney's wishes, but that doesn't mean what they're implying it means, nor can "''irreconcilable''" even be applied in conjunction with a bias. Perhaps they meant '':wikt:irredeemably|irredeemably''? Of course that's simply not true for an editable medium
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:V||WP:RS)

Comment: Any improperly sourced information can be fixed by editing the article. I and others have in fact already put quite a bit of effort towards rewriting it and improving the sourcing. I already suspected that persons with a |conflict of interest were editing this article, and the sudden arrival of a lawyer would seem to verify that suspicion. The article is well referenced due to the efforts of the past days. Its hard to write something positive about someone who is notable for being convicted of murder, robbery, burglary, conspiracy, grand larceny, illegal weapons possession, violation of anti-slavery laws, forgery and eavesdropping. That's not bias, it is properly |verified fact. Find some sources that say something positive about her and we'll happily include that to. Good luck finding them
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI||WP:V)

Comment: The article appears to be sourced, the subject seems |notable, and
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)