[WikiEN-l] Legal threats

[David Boothroyd]

Fred Bauder writes:
>I think you might start with an inquiry regarding what makes Gregory 
>Lauder-Frost notable. Is it is political views and activities or is 
>it his personal life?

This issue has actually been raised on the talk page. It is generally
accepted that it is Gregory Lauder-Frost's political activities
prior to 1992 which make him notable. Some argue that his activities
as a genealogist are also sufficient to make him notable. A small group
believes he may also be notable for the child custody dispute in which
he was involved (which was contended by his counsel to be connected to
his conviction).

However, that question surely does not help resolve the issue of
whether it is reasonable to mention his conviction. In my view the
principle is clear: if a person meets notability for a biographical
article, then the whole of their life is notable even if on its own
it would not qualify them. For example, Bill Clinton is not a notable
saxophone player - he would not qualify for an article based on
having played the saxophone - but it is reasonable to mention this
fact in his article because it is a significant part of how he was
perceived.

To take another example, how about politicians whose careers have
been terminated by external scandals? One could not plausibly argue
in the case of [[Peter Baker (UK politician)]] that because the
financial scandal that caused his expulsion from the House of Commons
was unrelated to his political career, it ought not to be mentioned.

The legal issues relating to Gregory Lauder-Frost have all been
considered and there is nothing which would prevent a suitable,
balanced, neutral, sourced and factual article being written. In
order to be fully comprehensive, it would have to mention, in its
proper context, the fact of his 1992 conviction.
-- 
David Boothroyd - http://www.election.demon.co.uk
david at election.demon.co.uk (home)
dboothroyd at westminster.gov.uk (council)