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.
Contested PROD. reason was "While not a copyright violation (the source is licenced for onward use) this is unsuitable as an article for the many reasons flagged at the head. In brief summary of this it is unreferenced WP:OR."
Since then the issues list has grown substantially. This needs to go, and go at AfD, in order to set a precedent against recreation of the same material.
FiddleFaddle 16:25, 13 October 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete. It's possible that LeHo is notable, e.g., see
[1] (and no, I don't know if this is a reliable source). However, the current incarnation of the article has got to go. Lacking any independent sources, it reads more like a sales brochure than anything else. Should someone like to actually find the requisite reliable sources, and then describe LeHo, more power to them. Until then, delete it. --
Larry/Traveling_Man (
talk) 04:38, 14 October 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment This actually now does contains copyright violations, as the source is licensed under CC-BY 4.0, and the Foundation Legal
have determined that this license is not backwards compatible with CC-BY-SA 3.0.
CrowCaw 22:23, 15 October 2014 (UTC)reply
I see no mention anywhere of what the incompatibility might be. Any reference for that? It remains listed at
Wikipedia:File copyright tags/Free licenses. Probably the difficulty is " Those who reproduce the work must attribute it in the manner specified by the author or licensor" (from
Template:Cc-by-sa-4.0)/ This is likely to cause considerable confusion, as I suspect authors will pick this tag not realizing its different, and should be given the opportunity to correct it by relicensing. DGG (
talk ) 20:22, 20 October 2014 (UTC)reply
@
DGG: Here was the section on Moonriddengirl's page about this (towards the bottom):
[2].
CrowCaw 22:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)reply
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.