Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas James Longley
Many references, although most are either trivial or of uncertain |reliability.  I'm assuming that the 2004 Times article is more substantial and direct, as it is cited as directly praising the subject.  If this is the case, this probably is enough to constitute notability alongside the other sources
— User:JulesH, 18:26, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)