Talk:Phillip Leo

This article was nominated for deletion on 22 October 2017. The result of the discussion was keep.

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.

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Pep67 (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article.

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

Name of subject

Do we know whether the singer legally changed is name? It affects how the intro sentence is rendered. —C.Fred (talk) 14:07, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright information and unsourced/original research

Hi Pep67 and 94.173.15.161. The information was removed by Theroadislong as it appears to be a copyright of what is here https://islandahradio.com/biography/. Now Pep67, you claim you wrote the information but on the Islandah Radio it has this on the bottom of it Copyright Islandah Radio, All Rights Reserved 2013. The second issue if you did write it, is there is no sources for the information and all appears to be WP:ORIGINAL which is also not allowed on Wikipedia. All information on the page should be WP:VERIFY and WP:RELIABLE and that can't be confirmed if there isn't sources attached too the information. So this information should be removed until such time as both of those problems are sorted. NZFC^(talk) 02:39, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@NZ Footballs Conscience, Primefac, and Pep67:

Note: The text in question appears to have actually originated from https://www.biglionproductions.com/about, which, per the statement at the bottom of the website, is now available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. (This release was made only very recently, so you were definitely justified in removing the content earlier. For users with OTRS access, see also ticket:2017102610000258.) As a result, unless there's something I missed, I believe the content may be freely imported to Wikipedia as long as attribution is provided, such as by {{CCBYSASource}} or {{CC-notice}}. Although it's now freely licensed, it still needs to be edited to fit encyclopedic standards; indeed, Wikipedia isn't obligated to use text from there at all. Mz7 (talk) 00:25, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mz7 for your message, glad that is sorted. The next thing will be for the information to be sourced as before it also appeared as original research, but at least that might be able to be fixed too. NZFC^(talk) 00:41, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The content has been copied and pasted from here [1] again, it may be copyright free now, I don't know, but it sure isn't a neutral encyclopdic tone!Theroadislong (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree Theroadislong, Pep67 it is fine that your information is now displayed but you need to now have verifiable sources for each bit of information you have written. Information can't be on a WP:BLP just because you know it too be true. Wikipedia calls that original research and it isn't allow. If you need any help, please ask. NZFC^(talk) 19:11, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]