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 sourcedmust 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 was nominated for deletion on 10 November 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus.
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Royalty (a child project of the Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to British Royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.British RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject British RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject British RoyaltyBritish royalty articles
Publication of libelous material used for blackmail is inappropriate. FredTalk 16:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what has happened to the earlier version. The information about "Witness A" is freely available on the net. It is just being protected to protect the royals. Why has an American Wikipedian of all people deleted it?
Err, it is not an American wikipedia, please correct your erroneous perception, it is an international encyclopedia in English. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:11, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
True, but we are governed by Florida law, not English law. PatGallacher (talk) 16:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speak for yourself, I am governed by neither one nor the other. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbibby did not say "American Wikipedia", he said "an American Wikipedian", meaning an American user of Wikipedia. So who was the royal? This information seems unexpectedly elusive. leevclarke (talk) 20:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I have found a source for this information, which is The Royal Blackmail Plot on Everything2. If the Wikipedia servers are in Florida, are we allowed to publish this information in the article? It seems very pertinent, and if it's legal then it should be in this article, and in the article on the royal family member in question. leevclarke (talk) 20:29, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
.svg){kind=small}
