Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lloyd E. Levine


 * 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 delete simply because everything in this article is copied from, and possibly other places. The site reads "© 2006 California State Assembly". This deletion is without prejudice against an article being written in a Wikipedia editors own words though. W.marsh 19:47, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Lloyd E. Levine

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The following was spotted on the talk page of this debate:

Almost the entire text of this page is virtually identical with that of Levine's official website. It therefore constitutes little more than PR. While some of the isolated facts may be true, the blatant copying precludes it from being a neutral, encyclopedic article. Anyone wishing to write a legitimate, multi-sourced and balanced article on Levine would have to start fresh, so it makes sense to delete this puff piece.

This is a procedural nomination for, so I have no opinion yet. MER-C 07:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - elected member of parliament of the most populous US state. Needs a rewrite, though. MER-C 08:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep tending to delete due to lack of sources and references Alf photoman 11:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. This does not require a complete rewrite, and elected officials for California are definitely notable, as with any other state. Like I've said in other discussions like this, avoiding systemic bias doesn't mean we delete people who are notable because equally notable people are affected by our bias. Add sources, though. -Amark moo! 20:59, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. State assemblymen are not inherently notable, no other indication of notability.  Reads like it was written by a staffer or campaign volunteer.  Edeans 21:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Come on. Highways are inherently notable according to our current practice. -Amark moo! 21:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Tag as Copyvio or Delete if it truly is identical to the assemblyman's webpage. I have had to do this with a number of PA State Reps who feel that copying thier self-serving bios is legit.  If someone actually thinks this person is worthwhile, they will write something in their own words.  Montco 03:26, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, put on cleanup or stubify. Passes WP:BIO, to wit, "Political figures holding or who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislature." Edeans, please be aware of the actual guidelines. --Dhartung | Talk 05:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per WP:CSD G11 and possible G12. A very close paraphrase of the assemblyman's webpages means that this may be a copyvio, and is certainly blatant advertising. If someone cares to write an article on Levine using neutral, third-party sources, that would be great, but this has to go and there is nothing worth salvaging. The creation summary ("Added content letting people know who Assemblymember Lloyd Levine is and what issues he's championed during his time in the California State Assembly") and the fact it was created by an SPA seem to me to be redolent of WP:COI and WP:ADS. Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:39, 9 February 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.