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.
Deleted as "Unambiguous copyright infringement". I'm not so sure about that, on Commons we have OTRS from (IIRC) the campaign manager. This should at least be discussed before deletion.
Alexis Jazz (
talk)
18:05, 13 October 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep, unless somebody can actually show the evidence of copyvio. Yes, this probably needs a bit of cleanup, but I'm not seeing anything that's egregiously advertorial enough to just assume it's a copyvio without actually seeing where it's purportedly copied from — and he does have a clean
WP:NPOL pass as a member of a state legislature, so even if there is a real copyvio issue here we would just rewrite the copyvio and then revdel the offending text from the edit history afterward, rather than entirely throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Bearcat (
talk)
06:35, 14 October 2018 (UTC)reply
@
Bearcat: some parts were written by his campaign manager (Vicfarland, confirmed by OTRS), while he has an obvious COI the contributions were generally fine NPOV-wise. If he had copied anything he had written previously for a campaign site (note: it doesn't look like that would even be the case), that wouldn't be a copyright violation.
Alexis Jazz (
talk)
13:50, 14 October 2018 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep; copyvio claims are completely unsubstantiated, no other valid arguments for deletion have been advanced, and the nominator's been blocked for block evasion. This statement applies only to the IPs; Anthony Appleyard is blameless. Copyvio always remains a reason for speedy deletion should the allegations be substantiated in the future.
Nyttend (
talk)
02:43, 15 October 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep. Per earwig -
[1] - there are some similarities to
Wes Duncan's campaign page. However which one came first and whether they are indeed close enough copies or violations (given authorship by Vicfarland) is a question. The individual clearly meets NPOL. The few phrases (as opposed to positions) which are possible copies should be cleaned up if this is indeed a vioaltion - that's not grounds for deletions.
Icewhiz (
talk)
06:55, 15 October 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep, but substantially clean up. The page currently quotes his campaign website. I have also never seen a page for a one term state legislator devote an entire section to military history, which I suspect also came from his campaign.
Avidohioan (
talk)
19:58, 15 October 2018 (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.