Talk:Chris Gebhard

relevance of cannabis content
It looks like a very slow edit war over the past year, with low-edit editors both adding and removing the following content:

I agree with the editors who've been removing this content. The main sources (legislative vote databases) are cherry-picked primary sources; there are no independent sources attesting any significance to Gebhard's votes on this issue. The hempgazette doesn't even mention Gebhard. The juxtaposition of Hoaster, Gebhard & Co (again, using only primary sources) appears to insinuate some sort of conflict of interest on Gebhard's part, but not citing any independent sources that make that connection. I don't see any reason why these two votes, out of all the votes Gebhard made, are WP:DUE for inclusion. Schazjmd  (talk)  20:56, 10 June 2024 (UTC)