Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony J. Motley
and improve to give a full and balanced summary of the range of views available. The sources E.M. Gregory points to above are sufficient to meet . The ''Washington City Paper'' pieces are well larded with speculation, innuendo, and sensationalism, and would have to be used carefully, but the ''Washington Post'' pieces are better, and several are substantial, such as http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1999-12/25/011r-122599-idx.html, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/28/AR2006112800701.html and http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/01/magazine/magazine_perl082701.htm, and http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/24/AR2010022405139.html
— User:Worldbruce, 00:15, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)