Talk:Cecil Johnson
Latest comment: 15 years ago by HBombL in topic Proposed deletion of Cecil Johnson
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WikiProject class rating edit
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot (talk) 18:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Cecil Johnson edit
I think that this page needs to be deleted if for the sole reason that most of these examples seem to be absolute gibberish and unverifiable. Unless a source can be proposed which contests this theory, then I propose this page be deleted. HBombL (talk) 14:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC)