| 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 sourced must 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 is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Lack of Citations
editYesterday a freshly-created account, @Alumcheck added a series of citations to Mr. Lowe's work, which were promptly reverted by @EasyAsPai. I have two concerns:
- there is no support at all for almost the entire Cases section, and the reverted edits just continued this pattern
- the disputed text also included some publications by Mr. Lowe. I would think that a publication can be used as a citation for its own existence (but not for notability) under a liberal reading of WP:SELFSOURCE. As far as I'm concerned, @Alumcheck can add back self-published articles and books.
With respect to the Cases section, my recommendation would be to either:
- Option 1 delete the entire cases section
- Option 2 delete only the cases which are not linked to another article (although I can't say Mr. Vaughn is mentioned in those articles and I'm not going to do it right now)
Almost a year ago, I made the following observation which I think remains true today: "this is an exceptionally poorly cited article, but probably not a a candidate for deletion as he meets NPROF due to professorial chair. The case citation section should probably be deleted as it's only supported by a self-published source." The events of yesterday only reinforce the lack of verifiability of the majority of this article.
If there are no concerns/comments within a reasonable period I'm likely to proceed with Option 1 -- this article has to follow the same rules as any other, and WP:RS and WP:BLP are not being honored. Oblivy (talk) 01:41, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- I've taken the step of deleting all the unsourced material, leaving the publications.and a small amount of biographical information which is available from the Oxford website. The publications are probably self-authenticating, but licensing history and history of arbitral appointments are not. Oblivy (talk) 01:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging @Vlowe to alert them to this thread involving edits by @Alumcheck in case they aren't aware. Oblivy (talk) 11:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Copyright status of the image looks problematic. Alumcheck updated it as own work, but recorded it as by a portrait painter, Simon Davis. So unless Alumcheck is Davis, this should probably be removed. Tacyarg (talk) 11:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed. The image has a 7-day countdown on commons which ends around the 8th, after which it will be deleted, but no objection to removing it now as it's unlikely to be Alumcheck's IP. Oblivy (talk) 11:41, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Copyright status of the image looks problematic. Alumcheck updated it as own work, but recorded it as by a portrait painter, Simon Davis. So unless Alumcheck is Davis, this should probably be removed. Tacyarg (talk) 11:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging @Vlowe to alert them to this thread involving edits by @Alumcheck in case they aren't aware. Oblivy (talk) 11:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC)