Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward J. Zajac

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 SNOW Keep which is also then a Speedy Keep, considering not only is the user simply stating some apparent "access information violations", but there is no other countercomments suggesting why and how we should not actually consider the WP:PROF notability, which he certainly satisfies therefore Keep, with no outstanding suggestions of Deletion (NAC). SwisterTwister talk 04:25, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edward J. Zajac

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page is deleted as a result of privacy violation and of unauthorized access to personal information page — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasNDT (talk • contribs) 22:46, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 September 27. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:03, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He's the James F. Beré Chair Professor of Management and Organizations, and someone who holds a named chair appointment at a major institution of higher education and research is considered notable. The Kellogg School of Management definitely sounds like a major institution. We can delete articles here about notable topics, but basically only if the article is really bad, and I see no real issues with this stub article — in particular, nothing privacy-related. ThomasNDT, would you explain your rationale more fully? Where is the privacy violation, and what personal information page was accessed improperly? And how should those influence our opinion as to whether Zajac passes our inclusion criteria, or how should those influence our opinion as to whether the article's so bad that we need to trash it and start over? Nyttend (talk) 10:21, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nyttend: Thank you for having considered my request. As the person who created the article, I request deletion of this page for three resons. First, due to my fault, the information that Edward Zajac is a Chair Professor is incorrect, and he does not hold any chair appointment. Given the huge number of academic at Northwestern, he may not pass the nobility criteria. Second, the wikipedia article contains information that I took from his personal website, which restricts any reuse of information on any other websites, and wrong information (e.g. influenced person). Third and most important, his person picture was stolen from his personal laptop as part of information theft and privacy breach. Therefore, I would like to ask for permission to delete Edward Zajac's article. Thank you for your time and consideration — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasNDT (talk • contribs) 11:10, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- What are you taking about?? His official profile page[1] at Northwestern says: James F. Bere Professor of Management & Organizations. So he does hold a named chair appointment. Regarding the photo File:Ed Zajac profile pic.jpg: You uploaded this photo to Wikipedia yourself describing the source as "Own work", that is, that you took the photo yourself. If you lied in specifying that the photo was your "Own work", you should unlink the photo from the article and tag the photo file for deletion. But that's not a good reason to delete the article. Nsk92 (talk) 11:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. ThomasNDT, I think you have misunderstood what AfD is for and how things work around here in general. When you created and made any subsequent edits to the article, you agreed to irrevocably release your contributions to the Wikipedia community and anybody else who wants to use it (have a look at the text right above the "Save changes" button on any page). You don't own the article, so you can't simply ask for it to be deleted because you now regret writing it. AfD is a process where the community discusses whether or not an article should be deleted, based mainly on whether or not its subject meets our criteria for inclusion – see the deletion policy.
As for your three reasons above – Northwestern's website clearly states that Zajac holds a named chair which satisfies our criteria for the inclusion of academics. I don't understand why you would now claim this is false. Your second two reasons are also troubling. If you copied text verbatim from Zajac's website then you released copyrighted text without permission and this will need to be identified and removed. However, simply taking information from a website, so long as you properly reference where you got it from, is standard practice and how all articles are written. Could you please clarify which is the case? Regarding File:Ed_Zajac_profile_pic.jpg, you uploaded it yourself last May and claimed it was your own work, so are you saying you stole it (or his laptop)?? Joe Roe (talk) 12:14, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Joe Roe: There is some misunderstanding of the difference between plagiarism and copyright infringement. While plagiarism is claiming attribution for a work you did not create, or using someone else’s work without proper attribution, copyright infringement is using someone else’s work without obtaining their permission. Therefore, the fact that the article has a reference link to the source of information (for example his CV or personal page) does not mean that copyright is not infringed. On top of that my declaring the photo as my own work does not mean I have the ownership right over the photo. The photo belongs to Ed. Zajac and I I was not aware of the problem and wrongly provided it to Wikipedia without permission. Therefore, I would like to acknowledge the copyright infringement and unauthorized use of the photo, and take correction actions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasNDT (talk • contribs) 16:44, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - @ThomasNDT:. There's no confusion on my part, at least. Infringing the copyright of text consists of copying or closely paraphrasing it. There is simply not enough prose text in Edward J. Zajac to constitute a copyright violation. If you did not, in fact, have permission to release the photo then yes it should be deleted – I've nominated it at FfD. However, you have not advanced a valid reason that the article should be deleted apart from the fact that you (or Zajac?) want it to be. What do you mean when you say it is a violation of privacy? Joe Roe (talk) 17:17, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. All of the information in the article appears to be non-private, and (the photo excepted) too brief and factual to be a copyvio. The case for WP:PROF#C5 is a little weaker than it might normally be, as (according to http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/faculty/directory/zajac_edward.aspx#vita) he was given the named title two years before being promoted to full professor, rather than (as is more commonly the case and the criterion expects) it being a marker of distinction at a level beyond a normal full professor. Nevertheless, his Google scholar profile also shows a clear pass of WP:PROF#C1. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:49, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep Zajac passes the notability guidelines and the nominator hasn't presented a clear rationale for this article's deletion....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:23, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:47, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Holds a named chair at a major institution. We are here to debate notability of the subject, not quality of the article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:11, 28 September 2016 (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.