Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam4Adam
WP:WEB does''' '''''not''''' '''say''':  "A topic is ''not'' notable ''unless'' it has been the ''exclusive'' subject (etc)."  An article discussing how Adam4Adam was used to lead a person into a situation in which he was murdered certainly does qualify as |verifiable |notability. An article about how Adam4Adam and Manhunt.net can lead to discharge from the Military qualifies as well.  These aren't trivial mentions and these aren't trivial subjects.  I bet most of us will think what we have here is |verifiable |notability. I bet a few will argue it isn't.  We can discuss semantics and wikilawyer each other senseless.  We could also Wikipedia:Use your best judgment|use our best judgement a little.  Are the references here a smoke screen or has Adam4Adam really gotten spontaneous media courage?  Is this article spammy and pointless POV clutter or is it more in keeping with the sort of NPOV encyclopedic info we generally strive to present
— User:Shaundakulbara, 07:19, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:V||WP:N||WP:V||WP:N (Wikipedia:Verifiability)