Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Calamos


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was keep. John254 17:35, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

John Calamos

 * — (View AfD)

Recreation of deleted content Pleclech 16:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC) Recreation of deleted copyvio content - this article was recently speedied as copyvio from Forbes. The same user (who has a history of copyvio) has recreated it, but put the copyvio material on the talk page this time rather than in the article. For some background on the user see Major_article_spam.


 * Keep as patently notable and well-referenced. Tarinth 16:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It's copyvio which needs to be addressed first. Pleclech 16:56, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * What's the copyvio? It's a two sentenace stub... If it is really a copyvio then I'm sure someone could reword it with less effort than this AfD will consume. Tarinth 16:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep You can't copyright facts. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 17:10, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, and I don't see how just being an article about someone listed at Forbes is a copyvio. Delete the copyvio from the Talk page (no, don't bother, it's so ridiculously easy I'll do that for you). --Dhartung | Talk 20:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, but expand and properly cite sources Alf photoman 20:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Notable person. If truly a copy vio, afd is not the place for it. may need rewrite and some cites.  -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.