Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Saxton
Do you all really think that a mention or two as being a letter writer in 10 articles in 10 papers on the same topic on the same day makes someone notable?  The topic of a politician accusing Scientology conducting torture is probably notable. I maintain that the whistleblower is not independently notable, and at best this should be merged/redirected to a more complete article on the Criticism of Scientology in Australia, Scientology_controversies#Allegations_of_criminality or a similar article.  Show me one article where Saxton's life is described as more than a letter writer?  As Pieter Kuiper said above... what is his occupation?  Of the links listed above and in the article, apart from the youtube interview and the 3news.co.nz (#14) I would not consider any of them significant coverage.  Focusing the article on the whistleblower in my mind is wrong - it should be on the the topic that he whistleblew.  And I think the |link bombing of the basically the same story in 30 references is overkill - number of references alone is no indication of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lelo Sejean|notabilty
— User:The, 12:01, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:BOMBARD (Wikipedia:Citation overkill)