Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert J. Gorman: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Frommeyer (talk | contribs)
Robdurbar (talk | contribs)
response
Line 1: Line 1:
====[[Robert J. Gorman]]===
===[[Robert J. Gorman]]===
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|B}}
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|B}}
:{{la|Robert J. Gorman}} – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert J. Gorman|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 February 26#{{anchorencode:Robert J. Gorman}}|View log]])</noinclude>
:{{la|Robert J. Gorman}} – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert J. Gorman|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 February 26#{{anchorencode:Robert J. Gorman}}|View log]])</noinclude>
Line 12: Line 12:
***'''Question'''. Thanks '''Dhartung''' and I agree 110%. Would editors and fact checkers find this 6 page PDF file useful [http://www.gormangrp.com/Saturday_Evening_Post_1956_Prisoner_16688.pdf 1956 Reprint] about the Roy Eaton story and case? Like the one-hour 1957 NBC documentary Error in Judgment, I suspect are both from a "human interest perpestive" written for mass consumption by the general public. '''Important Question''' - If you look at the 1956 copyright reprint permission at the very end of the PDF file, does this allow me to cite this file as a reference on the RJ page? <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Frommeyer|Frommeyer]] ([[User talk:Frommeyer|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Frommeyer|contribs]]) 12:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
***'''Question'''. Thanks '''Dhartung''' and I agree 110%. Would editors and fact checkers find this 6 page PDF file useful [http://www.gormangrp.com/Saturday_Evening_Post_1956_Prisoner_16688.pdf 1956 Reprint] about the Roy Eaton story and case? Like the one-hour 1957 NBC documentary Error in Judgment, I suspect are both from a "human interest perpestive" written for mass consumption by the general public. '''Important Question''' - If you look at the 1956 copyright reprint permission at the very end of the PDF file, does this allow me to cite this file as a reference on the RJ page? <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Frommeyer|Frommeyer]] ([[User talk:Frommeyer|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Frommeyer|contribs]]) 12:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
*'''Curiosity Question'''. I'm not going to delete it, but can any of you tell who recently added the "'''i am gay'''" at the very beginningof the article? Again, I'm brand new at making entries to Wikipedia (started 4 days ago). Does this type of thing happen offen? The exact same entry was made on another article that I created. Who cleans this garbage up? '''General Question''' Is the original author of a Wikipedia article charged with the responsibility of monitoring the article once it is finally approved? Just real curious. [[User:Frommeyer|Frommeyer]] 15:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Curiosity Question'''. I'm not going to delete it, but can any of you tell who recently added the "'''i am gay'''" at the very beginningof the article? Again, I'm brand new at making entries to Wikipedia (started 4 days ago). Does this type of thing happen offen? The exact same entry was made on another article that I created. Who cleans this garbage up? '''General Question''' Is the original author of a Wikipedia article charged with the responsibility of monitoring the article once it is finally approved? Just real curious. [[User:Frommeyer|Frommeyer]] 15:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
::I can't see 'i am gay' on the article anywhere? Yeah, [[WP:VAND|vandalsim]] of articles does happen. No, its not really anyone's responsibility to attend to an article, its the community's role as a whole. --[[User:Robdurbar|Robdurbar]] 18:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:35, 28 February 2007

Robert J. Gorman

Robert J. Gorman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Has been listed as a speedy, but I didn't think it quite fitted into that. To be honest with you, I don't know enough about law or otherwise to be sure enough that he isn't notable to speedy delete, if you see what I mean. Also, its worth noting that this is one of many articles written about the same family by the same user. So, nominating for deletion but I can be convinced otherwise. Robdurbar 23:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep RJ is another matter than his son. RJ is a major civil rights attorney with a long reputation and participation in many historic events. The article is specifically given as a beginning, and should not be deleted unless it is clear that there will not be enough to prove N and V-- and we have at least 2 good ones here. His key cases have not yet been added, but they will--an indication of them can be seen in the obits cited., which are from reputable newspapers. DGG 04:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The case he won was before the Illinois Supreme Court, not the US Supreme Court. (This and this are all I found about it.) The case may have had repercussions in Illinois but this is a weak case for notability and no other major legal accomplishments are cited. Being with Ike at D-Day or marching on Washington are interesting sidebars to an article but not in themselves notable. There's potential here but I don't see it. --Dhartung | Talk 06:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
will take some looking,then. we have a few days. I agree that it has to be the cases, unless something else should surface.DGG 06:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I think DGG is 100% correct! I've yet to finish RJ's article, because I'm still learning how to cite references and sources that can be vefified by any fact checker. FYI - I am NOT an attorney, so I'm a little handicapped at citing legal references - but I'm in the process of learning. There's several important civil rights cases (most on a pro-bono basis) that RJ was involved with that I'm till trying to cite and document that clearly illustrates his importance. Frommeyer 17:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your Help Please I fully understand the need for editors to check & verify facts. I have a link to a PDF file of a six (6) page feature article about the Roy Eaton case (he spent 16 years in prison for a crime he did not commit) that was in the Saturday Evening Post in 1956. Can I put a link to this article on the RJ page for you check? Right now, I suspect that it would / could / might be more appropreate within it's own "People vs Roy Eaton" article? Likewise, I suspect that the NBC's 1957 television documentary "Error in Judgement" requires its own seperate Wikipedia article that can be linked to from RJ's page? Your help and guidance would be most appreciated. Frommeyer 17:22, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • The person who wishes to include information in Wikipedia is responsible for backing up that information with reliable sources so that we can properly cite any assessments. If there are so many important civil rights cases in his career, then it should be an easy matter to find sources. --Dhartung | Talk 00:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Question. Thanks Dhartung and I agree 110%. Would editors and fact checkers find this 6 page PDF file useful 1956 Reprint about the Roy Eaton story and case? Like the one-hour 1957 NBC documentary Error in Judgment, I suspect are both from a "human interest perpestive" written for mass consumption by the general public. Important Question - If you look at the 1956 copyright reprint permission at the very end of the PDF file, does this allow me to cite this file as a reference on the RJ page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Frommeyer (talkcontribs) 12:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  • Curiosity Question. I'm not going to delete it, but can any of you tell who recently added the "i am gay" at the very beginningof the article? Again, I'm brand new at making entries to Wikipedia (started 4 days ago). Does this type of thing happen offen? The exact same entry was made on another article that I created. Who cleans this garbage up? General Question Is the original author of a Wikipedia article charged with the responsibility of monitoring the article once it is finally approved? Just real curious. Frommeyer 15:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see 'i am gay' on the article anywhere? Yeah, vandalsim of articles does happen. No, its not really anyone's responsibility to attend to an article, its the community's role as a whole. --Robdurbar 18:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]