Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Gordon N. Converse

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

The result of the discussion was: delete. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:46, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Gordon N. Converse


This draft has been blanked as a copyright violation, and nothing has been added in four weeks. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:01, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Appears notable.  If there is a copyright violation, please be explicit, a copyright violation of what?  Surely, it can be fixed.  I have just welcomed the author.  The failures here are failure of the AfC process.  Let's see if the user returns to read the welcome.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:05, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Soft delete. Appears notable. Author, should be return, should be encouraged to try again. Very mild copyright issue in the history, author needs to know to not excessively copy source text. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:39, 13 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete the copyvio was confirmed and redacted. Now we just have a contentless page. Legacypac (talk) 08:20, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment - User:SmokeyJoe - I don't see what the failure of the AFC process is unless you think that the submission of an AFC draft creates a duty for the reviewers to replace the copyvio text with their own writing. As Legacypac says, it is now contentless.  The page was contentless when I nominated it for deletion.  What do you want?  At this point, I think that the failure is that of the author.  Robert McClenon (talk) 22:16, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * For any allegation of copyright violation, I want a record "of what". Is it of http://www.csmonitor.com/1999/0217/p9s1.html? If so, happy to delete. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:30, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * "Failure of the AFC" process refers to failure to welcome and engage new article writers, failure to provide important links for reading that they can see in the shadow of the giant blue button. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:34, 13 June 2017 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.