Jump to content

Talk:Marion Rodgers

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Truartagenda (talk | contribs) at 03:11, 9 September 2016 (→‎Contested deletion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... 1) there appear to be enough references listed to indicate notability for Marion Rodgers. 2) the copyvios are from quotes from an interview with Rogers that this page creator originally posted verbatim, they are not text lifted from another article about Rogers. 3) the page creator is brand new and has been working hard to improve this article and rewrite it since yesterday, I would at least give him/her time to continue the improvements --ABF99 (talk) 04:11, 3 September 2016 (UTC) I have removed the speedy deletion tag from the article. --ABF99 (talk) 07:35, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@ABF99: It wasn't just "quotes" it was entire paragraphs of text directly lifted from another source. Even if this article stays, which I'll get into in a moment, the entire history has to be revision deleted. You can't just leave copyvios like that, even in the history, and if you don't know how to handle them correctly please ask but please don't just go removing tags without following through. That just leaves more cleanup for the rest of us. Second, I tagged it A7 as well because I could find very little from reliable sources that show that this person meets our criteria for inclusion. In the reference section now you have, multiple blogs, a getty image, a book that mentions Rodgers all of twice, and a few news sources about his 92nd birthday. Not exactly convincing that they meet the bar for inclusion. I tried to look for additional sources and could not find any. Perhaps you will have better luck but if you can't, I'm afraid I will be putting this towards AfD in a few days. --Majora (talk) 17:48, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]


I also contest the deletion, as the daughter of Marion Rodgers, who is indeed a Documented Original Tuskegee Airman. The narrative is in his own words and I was forced, by your criteria, to put most of it into third person narrative. There are not copyrighted materials included and all photos are family property. LtC Marion Rodgers is mentioned in several books including: Tuskegee Airmen 1941-1945 (Kenneth Rapier,) [1](Pages 16 and 138) 172.56.10.180 (talk) 00:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Denise A. R. Vosburgh[reply]

I just removed a huge chunk of unsourced content. Wikipedia is not a place to leave personal thoughts and personal experiences. ALL content must be a summary of published, independent, reliable sources. Yes, you were "forced" to abide by our criteria. Did you think this would be different? Wikipedia has standards and you must follow them. Please take a look at the following policies and guidelines that we have.
Do not add unreferenced content. Do not add personal information that cannot be backed up through reliable sources. It will be removed. --Majora (talk) 00:21, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Truartagenda

Okay then, I will gladly bow out.

Unfortunately what Majora said above is true. If you are a relative or close friend of Marion Rodgers, you really shouldn't be editing this article at all, since Wikipedia is pretty strict about people not editing who have a Conflict of Interest.. I contested the deletion because it did seem that there were enough references to prove notability for Rodgers, and as you can see, I added a bunch of references that another editor could potentially use as sources to add more info to the article. However, we welcome new editors and I hope that you will continue to learn about Wikipedia and contribute to other articles where you do not have a conflict of interest. There are also some messages on your talk page. Please feel free to contact me there or on my talk page if you have any questions. Thank you ABF99 (talk) 01:33, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I want to thank you by the way ABF99 for your work on this article. It seems to meet notability now. Just need to keep it neutral and sourced. That is what matters now. --Majora (talk) 01:37, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, Majora, thanks for waiting a few days on this one. I still think some of the language could be tightened up and checked against sources, but I'm working on it. ABF99 (talk) 02:03, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]