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. —Kurykh 21:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chris D. Jackson[edit]

Well, firstly much of this is copied directly, by the subject of the article, from here. That article specifically states "Copyright © 1998-2007 Lawrence County Tennessee Government.", and since the author is not actually the government (though he is part of it) I think that counts as copvio. It has already been deleted at least twice as such (and once as "Chris D Jackson", without the full stop). However, since it is about him - he says "That is my info that I am submitting for the page. It is in the public domain. Thanks ChrisDJackson" on the talk page - I don't know if that obviates that.

Secondly, it is autobiographical. I know this is not in itself a reason for deletion, but you would think that if he really wants a WP entry he could write it himself instead of cutting and pasting.

Thirdly, notability. WP:BIO says: "Just being an elected local official does not guarantee notability", but also : Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage". Is three local papers significant? You decide. Chris 08:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While there are a few articles about him, I have serious doubts about his notability. My main issue is the article's POV, which leans towards "this man is the greatest guy ever" in many articles with COI problems. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 13:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
cleaned up somewhat; I removed the 1/3 that was PR-style verbiage, which probably fixes the copyright question as well. DGG (talk) 17:14, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete - I really dont think an encyclopedia is the place to have articles about. County Commissioners. These people/positions have no notability outside their local area of coverage. Corpx 19:32, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Chris 20:26, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD isn't (technically) about voting; give a reason for your suggestion. Also, put your !vote at the end of the current discussion if not replying to another !vote. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 20:47, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well actually, it was me that nominated it and I gave a whole list of reasons there. The reason I put my "vote" at the top is because I forgot to put it there when I made the nomination :) Chris 21:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh. Forget I said anything, then :) ... although I suppose you could have said "Delete as nominator." —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 21:49, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Personally, I don't see how my entry doesn't qualify when folks such as Christopher Seeley, Sam Juhl and Michael Sessions do. All have been elected on the local level and are among the youngest ever elected around the country--the same as I was. Same premise and notability standard. Second, I am the owner of the text that was used, as I am the chair of the technology committee which has control over the website, so that is no big deal. If someone wishes to edit the article, maybe trim it down or make changes, that is fine. But I would respectfully ask for the article to stay in the context that entries about similar people and feats have been kept. ChrisDJackson

Have a glance at this before making that argument. And a look at this before you began probably would have been a good idea, too. --Calton | Talk 12:35, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per nom: no particular accomplishments, no strong milestones met, no good reason for keeping this. And the blatant conflict of interest/self-promotion ain't helping. --Calton | Talk 12:35, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as shameless self-promotion. Phil Sandifer 16:08, 2 August 2007 (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.