Talk:Isaac Collins (printer)

Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment
This article is part of Contributor copyright investigations/20210315 and the Good article (GA) drive to reassess and potentially delist over 200 GAs that might contain copyright and other problems. An AN discussion closed with consensus to delist this group of articles en masse, unless a reviewer opens an independent review and can vouch for/verify content of all sources. Please review Good article reassessment/February 2023 for further information about the GA status of this article, the timeline and process for delisting, and suggestions for improvements. Questions or comments can be made at the project talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)


 * @SandyGeorgia: I observe you have listed this for automatic deletion within 7 days. Looking at it, I don't feel like I could easily try and save this, given a large part of the prose is cited to a source that has no clear online version and is not PD, so at this moment I have no means to verify (perhaps your own conclusion too). Prior to the 7-day expiry, do you think there is scope for:
 * Stubbing the article as there are some PD sources to cite some basic things too
 * Draftifying to afford at least 6 months to assess (which in turn automatically deletes from mainspace anyway)
 * If I took a look at this, I feel it'd be a much heftier undertaking than the other article I am working on, so understand this couldn't be while it remains as-is in mainspace with the backdrop of the wider situation. Bungle (talk • contribs) 20:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * , my suggestion is to save offline copies of all of the sources you might think reusable (DC not only failed often to accurately represent sources, but not all sources were reliable, and also to place a non-copyvio verifiable stub at Talk:Isaac Collins (printer)/Temp before the seven days are up, as the CCI admin who deletes the article will move that stub in after they clear the current version. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  22:51, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Re draftifying, we can't draftify copyvio, as that is also copyvio. If you save the sources, and put a clean stub in the rewrite, you can then rebuild an accurate non-copyvio version from there, without having to go to draft space. Just be sure not to copy any DC content in to the Temp rewrite; best to use your own words. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  01:36, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Of course, I think the idea of putting to draft was more that it would afford time to determine if there is copyvio, which you state as being a matter of fact, but is actually only assumed. I accept that with this article, and the reliance on an as-yet unobtainable offline source, this can not be validated either way. Alas, seven days is really not long (five days now..) but I am sure there is enough in the PD sources to create an acceptable stub. I'll respond if I actually do that. Bungle (talk • contribs) 08:21, 19 March 2023 (UTC)