Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Reed

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy deleted by Tony Sidaway (Article without context. Too many Pete Reeds to be meaningful) --cesarb 01:36, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Reed[edit]

Not Notable. He + organisation's name give less that 10 googles. (Although I can think of plenty of other reasons to delete.)--Doc Glasgow 23:40, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

SPEEDIED. No meaningful content or history. There must be a Peter Reed in nearly every English speaking community. I did look at the history--no indication of which person was alleged to be a pedophile. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:02, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.