Talk:New Zealand Parole Board/Archive 1

NPOV
Part of a COI tag a concern about NPOV. I've just nominated the article at DYK (see above), and I expect that NPOV issues are required to be resolved. I myself couldn't see anything in the article that is of concern; can those editors who have concerns please note them here? I'd be happy to address any issues.  Schwede 66  18:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC)


 * The issue is that User:Offender9000 is using Wikipedia to promote his own POV (and his own self-published book) on the subject. See [] for more info. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I was aware of this going on and have now read the RfC. I have converted this article to shortened footnotes and in the process of using cite templates for books, have removed the external link to Flying Blind. As far as I can see, the article can do with a bit of wikifying and refs can do with a tidy up, and I'll get onto that. I can't see any content in the article that is of concern. If you (or anybody else) can, please point it out and I shall work towards resolving this.  Schwede 66  19:18, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


 * The footnotes includes links to "Brooking 2011" but clicking on them seems to do nothing. I presume something needs fixing with them. Nurg (talk) 11:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing that out. I have fixed it.  Schwede 66  19:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I have now read through the article (and removed two paragraphs which are mostly duplicated in another section). Offender9000 has contributed quite a substantial body of work relating to the New Zealand penal system to Wikipedia; he is an expert on the system not just amongst Wikipedians, but in New Zealand overall (judging by the testimonials on the Flying Blind website, and I note you saw him on TV3 recently, presumably in this context). His book is referenced twice, and an article on Scoop once. This is about 10 percent of the references in the article. I think this is acceptable and does not constitute self-promotion. I would be happy for the COI tag to be removed.- gadfium 01:18, 4 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I shall remove the COI tag for the time being. If others feel that this is not the right thing to do, please discuss the issue here.  Schwede 66  04:46, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you for your support on this issue. It is very much appreciated. Offender9000 (talk) 22:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because... WP:CSD states "Deletion is reversible, but only by administrators, so other deletions occur only after discussion. Speedy deletion is intended to reduce the time spent on deletion discussions for pages or media with no practical chance of surviving discussion."

This page is about the New Zealand Parole Board and is clearly of significance. It has every chance of surviving discussion - unfortunately it was deleted so quickly there was no discussion. Lets have some.

Supposedly the article was deleted under rule G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement. The rule says: "Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety" --Offender9000 (talk) 19:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

The Parole Board is happy for material on their website to be used verbatim or otherwise. Their copyright disclaimer says: "The copyright protected material may be reproduced free of charge in any format or media without requiring specific permission. This is subject to the material being reproduced accurately and not being used in a misleading context".Offender9000 (talk) 01:03, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That's not enough. See WP:PERMISSION. For all the gory details (and alas, there are lots of gory details). Stuartyeates (talk) 01:28, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

No permission is required. The Board's official website says: "The copyright protected material may be reproduced free of charge in any format or media without requiring specific permission." Offender9000 (talk) 02:20, 16 September 2012 (UTC)