Talk:Wolf Mail
Appearance
This article was nominated for deletion on 21 July 2009. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 18 May 2014. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Copyright violations
I note that this article has been the subject of several cases of
copyright violation - the copying verbatim, or almost verbatim, from external sources. The most recent instance was on 21 September 2010 when 203.219.184.103 copied the content of http://bellyup4blues.com/musicsubmit/wolf-mail into the article. I've warned the IP and Moirsteve, and removed the violating content: per policy it must not be reinserted unless completely rewritten in the editor's own words. —SMALLJIM 16:10, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
]
Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (your reason here) --Steve Moir (talk) 02:59, 18 May 2014 (UTC)My name is Steve Moir, I'm Wolf Mail's personal manager - [email protected] - Minor adjustments where made, regarding the early influence of the artist, at the artist' request, with appropriate references. Please let me know if additional explanation or infos are needed. Kind regards.
Policy compliance for bios
Per
WP:BLP we need to provide reliable sources in a biography of a living person. I'll try to trim what I can. An example of a bad source, is a link to a Wikipedia article. Also, citations need to name the publication, so it's easier for people to review. --Rob (talk) 23:56, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
]