Talk:Rocky Delgadillo
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Khazar2 in topic removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
| 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled edit
Did someone in the Delgadillo campaign write this entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.243.4.157 (talk) 21:39, 3 May 2006
- Apparently it was an almost verbatim copy of his official biography. [1]. I've removed all or most of the copied material. If someone wants to rewrite the biography with orginal material that'd be great. -Will Beback 22:04, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- It seems a lot of the stuff has come back. I cited the absence of sources in some places and changed some phrasing boo boos, but this is a self-aggrandizing entry if I ever read one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.212.134 (talk) 08:07, 1 December 2007
- A lot of mincing of words, "unbeknownst to him/her at the time", "believed to violate" etc. Looks like the Rock has staffers monitoring and "cleaning up" this page on the city dime. Ignorance of the law (or of one's legal status under the law) is no excuse. Why not just state outright that RDGD and his wife broke the law and misappropriated city resources for their own personal use? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.5.233.120 (talk) 06:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- It seems a lot of the stuff has come back. I cited the absence of sources in some places and changed some phrasing boo boos, but this is a self-aggrandizing entry if I ever read one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.212.134 (talk) 08:07, 1 December 2007
removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV edit
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
- This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
- There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
- It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
- In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
- This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 23:42, 1 July 2013 (UTC)