Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/State of Maryland v. Hardutt Singh

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 17:17, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

State of Maryland v. Hardutt Singh

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWS. Local corruption trial ending in a not guilty verdict. BLP problems made it. The article says there was no physical proof of a bribe. So why are publicizing a crime that didn't happen. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:26, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:27, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:27, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:27, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:27, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Because the defendant was acquitted, there are WP:BLP problems with keeping the article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 12:54, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Don't Delete. There are other cases on Wikipedia where the defendant was acquitted but these cases are still important based on other circumstances and media coverage. The Casey Anthony case is an example of this. In the DC area Hardutt's case was a big deal and continues to be because of problems with the metro, since they no longer have a consistent construction company contract. All information in this article is public record so it does not contradict WP:BLP. --BOTI4EVER1 (talk) 12:44, 21 March 2019 (EST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BOTI4EVER (talk • contribs)
Delete Fellow “DC area” resident here... this case is the least of the Metro’s gigantic problems. Wikipedia is not the Washington Post. This issue is of regional importance, if that. Trillfendi (talk) 19:48, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.