31:
391:
can delete at AfD for any good reason that has consensus, including such things as NOT HERE, which means not here to contribute according to the rules, but in contempt of them. I only have started doing it after others have been doing it unchallenged for many months. If the TOU mean anything, it means that contributions made in deliberate violation of them are not permitted.
408:
and notable controversies, and is free from advertorial content that would be a reason for keep unless the point is to punish paid editors. But I don't think we are suppoaed to be pointy? In this case I support deletion. I think I already said that.. If so I stand by it. Thanks for the discussion and explanations. Helpful.
407:
I guess the counter argument is that we should do what makes the encyclopedia better and that an article created by a paod editor me be on a notable subject, well written, and well sourced. If an editor in good standing is willing to review it carefully and make sure it's neutrally written, includes
347:
as a paid advertisement, even though the copy isn't overwhelmingly advertorial its creation is. But I would like to know what the established guidelines and precedents are when these subjects come up. I know I've voted to keep articles created by suspected paid editors if the articles were good and
390:
It has become acceptable but not obligatory practice to delete articles by undeclared paid editors regardless of notability. Some admins do it at Speedy, on the assumption that the paid editor is almost certainly the sock of an earlier paid banned editor, though we cannot be certain which. And we
425:, as I said before, if another editor decides to review and 'endorse' the content, then the deletion argument becomes a grey area (though the content was still created in violation of the ToU, so really it should be deleted and rewritten anyway). At that point
374:
would know. However, as the edits have been made in violation of wikipedia's terms of use, those edits can certainly be removed. If another unpaid editor endorses the edits, then it becomes a bit of a grey area, but that has not happened in this case. —
342:
Interesting. I read the linked discussion. Is there a community consensus that creations of paid editors can be deleted (at least as long as significant editing by others hasn't taken place)? Surely this happens fairly often? I support
197:
264:
278:
463:. Clear violation of ToU, and must be made an example of. Delete but do not salt in case someone in the future, unconnected with the subject, has the idea of creating a new one.
150:
292:
191:
250:
40:
157:
306:
DGG I can't get the link you made to work. What is
Knowledge (XXG) policy for dealing with notable article subjects added by paid editors?
17:
548:
123:
118:
362:
I am not personally aware of a consensus specifically endorsing deletion of undisclosed paid articles that are notable, perhaps
127:
212:
110:
87:
179:
530:
69:
46:
488:
437:
379:
331:
507:
173:
348:
the subject was notable. If undisclosed paid editing isn't accepted then certainly it should be deleted.
169:
526:
511:
494:
472:
443:
417:
413:
402:
385:
357:
353:
337:
315:
311:
298:
284:
270:
256:
242:
92:
65:
114:
503:
219:
205:
481:
430:
106:
98:
426:
468:
327:, I fixed the link. Paid editing is begrudgingly accepted, undisclosed paid editing is not. —
85:
58:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
525:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
64:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
422:
409:
349:
324:
307:
480:
Made in violation of the ToU. No significant other authors. Don't salt but do not issue a
228:
Created in apparent violation of the terms of use by known undeclared paid editor -- see
185:
542:
398:
367:
238:
464:
371:
231:
He is notable, so someone without a coi might want to eventually write an article.
82:
144:
433:
is necessary if we intend to have any control over undisclosed paid editing. —
429:
comes into effect though, which we should not be encouraging. Some amount of
393:
363:
233:
519:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
25:
265:
list of
Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
279:
list of
Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions
229:
140:
136:
132:
502:
does not meet the notability guidelines for academics.
204:
218:
72:). No further edits should be made to this page.
533:). No further edits should be made to this page.
291:Note: This discussion has been included in the
277:Note: This discussion has been included in the
263:Note: This discussion has been included in the
249:Note: This discussion has been included in the
293:list of California-related deletion discussions
8:
251:list of People-related deletion discussions
290:
276:
262:
248:
45:For an explanation of the process, see
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
41:deletion review on 2018 April 10
29:
47:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
1:
512:20:19, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
495:02:16, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
473:00:45, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
444:02:26, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
418:01:54, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
403:01:38, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
386:19:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
358:19:02, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
338:18:45, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
316:18:31, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
299:05:24, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
285:05:24, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
271:05:23, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
257:05:23, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
243:22:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
93:12:40, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
565:
549:Pages at deletion review
522:Please do not modify it.
61:Please do not modify it.
489:Insertcleverphrasehere
438:Insertcleverphrasehere
380:Insertcleverphrasehere
332:Insertcleverphrasehere
504:John Pack Lambert
491:
440:
382:
334:
301:
287:
273:
259:
53:
52:
39:was subject to a
556:
524:
487:
436:
378:
330:
223:
222:
208:
160:
148:
130:
63:
33:
32:
26:
564:
563:
559:
558:
557:
555:
554:
553:
539:
538:
537:
531:deletion review
520:
465:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง
165:
156:
121:
105:
102:
90:
77:The result was
70:deletion review
59:
37:This discussion
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
562:
560:
552:
551:
541:
540:
536:
535:
515:
514:
497:
475:
457:
456:
455:
454:
453:
452:
451:
450:
449:
448:
447:
446:
388:
319:
318:
303:
302:
288:
274:
260:
226:
225:
162:
101:
96:
88:
75:
74:
54:
51:
50:
44:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
561:
550:
547:
546:
544:
534:
532:
528:
523:
517:
516:
513:
509:
505:
501:
498:
496:
493:
492:
490:
483:
479:
476:
474:
470:
466:
462:
459:
458:
445:
442:
441:
439:
432:
431:WP:POINTYness
428:
424:
421:
420:
419:
415:
411:
406:
405:
404:
400:
396:
395:
389:
387:
384:
383:
381:
373:
369:
365:
361:
360:
359:
355:
351:
346:
341:
340:
339:
336:
335:
333:
326:
323:
322:
321:
320:
317:
313:
309:
305:
304:
300:
297:
294:
289:
286:
283:
280:
275:
272:
269:
266:
261:
258:
255:
252:
247:
246:
245:
244:
240:
236:
235:
230:
221:
217:
214:
211:
207:
203:
199:
196:
193:
190:
187:
184:
181:
178:
175:
171:
168:
167:Find sources:
163:
159:
155:
152:
146:
142:
138:
134:
129:
125:
120:
116:
112:
108:
104:
103:
100:
97:
95:
94:
91:
86:
84:
80:
73:
71:
67:
62:
56:
55:
48:
42:
38:
35:
28:
27:
19:
521:
518:
499:
486:
485:
477:
460:
435:
434:
392:
377:
376:
344:
329:
328:
296:
282:
268:
254:
232:
227:
215:
209:
201:
194:
188:
182:
176:
166:
153:
107:Hongyuan Zha
99:Hongyuan Zha
78:
76:
60:
57:
36:
423:FloridaArmy
410:FloridaArmy
350:FloridaArmy
325:FloridaArmy
308:FloridaArmy
192:free images
527:talk page
482:WP:REFUND
66:talk page
543:Category
529:or in a
427:WP:B1G1F
368:Primefac
151:View log
68:or in a
372:Kudpung
198:WP refs
186:scholar
124:protect
119:history
83:Yunshui
500:Delete
478:Delete
461:Delete
345:Delete
170:Google
128:delete
79:delete
399:talk
370:, or
239:talk
213:JSTOR
174:books
158:Stats
145:views
137:watch
133:links
16:<
508:talk
484:. —
469:talk
414:talk
354:talk
312:talk
206:FENS
180:news
141:logs
115:talk
111:edit
394:DGG
364:DGG
234:DGG
220:TWL
149:– (
545::
510:)
471:)
416:)
401:)
366:,
356:)
314:)
295:.
281:.
267:.
253:.
241:)
200:)
143:|
139:|
135:|
131:|
126:|
122:|
117:|
113:|
81:.
43:.
506:(
467:(
412:(
397:(
352:(
310:(
237:(
224:)
216:·
210:·
202:·
195:·
189:·
183:·
177:·
172:(
164:(
161:)
154:·
147:)
109:(
89:水
49:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.