Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James B. Walton
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. The subject satisfies WP:BIO, and the information provided below indicates that he also satisfies WP:V. Any remaining copyright concerns may be taken up at WP:CP. Non-admin close. --jonny-mt 05:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] James B. Walton
User keeps placing original research material that is not sourced with verifiable references.
Cross AfD: Armistead L. Long, Charles S. Venable, Archibald C. Godwin, Cullen A. Battle, Robert D. Johnston, David G. McIntosh, Montgomery D. Corse, Robert Ransom, Jr., and James B. Walton - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 08:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- Neutral, pending information about sources. This looks like it could be an okay article (perhaps). But the only reference note on it leads to nowhere. Needs some sources (and then a lot of improvement via WP:MOS). Unschool (talk) 08:32, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- Comment I updated the article as an example to the original editor, it still may have copyvio problems but I wasn't able to confirm that.Awotter (talk) 00:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- comment: this is so far from being OR as to be a likely copyvio; and the source is easily verifiable: just check out a copy of Stewart Sifakis, Who Was Who in the Confederacy (1989) ISBN 0816022046. --Paularblaster (talk) 01:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- the style of the articles is not uniform, so they are unlikely to have all been copied from the same book. DGG (talk) 02:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- In most of these articles Sefakis is the one and only source cited. If it backs up the claims without showing copyvio then there isn't a problem; if it doesn't source, or provides evidence of plagiarism, then deletion will be necessary. --Paularblaster (talk) 00:34, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- the style of the articles is not uniform, so they are unlikely to have all been copied from the same book. DGG (talk) 02:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - significant coverage in reliable sources Addhoc (talk) 21:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- 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.
