Talk:Cameron Colvin

Legal Controversies
Need to add more details. The references are loaded with details that would give more context the wikipedia page. Cyberchamp (talk) 04:04, 11 April 2023 (UTC)


 * The references are court documents, which means they're useless for these claims. We would prefer to have news reports on the court cases. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  Source assessment notes 20:54, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 * A news article came out yesterday about him, regarding all of the lawsuits and judgements against him 72.216.139.69 (talk) 11:37, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Link to it, please? —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  Source assessment notes 11:45, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * https://www.abc15.com/news/local-news/investigations/az-employees-business-partners-say-ex-nfl-player-owes-them-money 2601:8C0:882:9200:C497:3A3E:4046:1BF2 (talk) 13:28, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Good, now that's something I can work with sourcing-wise. Gimme some time to read it and wordsmith something. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  Source assessment notes 00:07, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Alright. Looking at this, I'm going to propose the following text, to be added to the lone sentence in the "Post-Sports Career" section and citing the abc15 piece:
 * "Both Colvin and CamCo have lost multiple separate civil court cases alleging fraud, breach of contract, failing to pay employees, and a handful of other related charges, totaling over eight million dollars."
 * I admit this could be better, but at present I'm fried from work. How's this grab you all? —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  Source assessment notes 00:17, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * That works well. 166.199.97.125 (talk) 00:18, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Added it. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  Source assessment notes 01:04, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Could use some elaboration on the summary
I've been reading the summary and doing research. I think plenty of research out there exists to increase the content of the summary. Likewise, the article seems to be written by somebody connected to the subject. Cyberchamp (talk) 04:07, 11 April 2023 (UTC)


 * And I've just taken a chainsaw to the article, removing everything sourced to statlines, primary sources, unusable sources, or nothing at all. Individual claims may be restored if a third-party reliable source is cited that corroborates them but as the article was it was a pretty significant policy violation. —Jéské Couriano v^&lowbar;^v  Source assessment notes 20:56, 11 April 2023 (UTC)