Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alleged self-plagiarism by Bruno Frey and others
- 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 G10'ed as an attack BLP. Author and sockpuppet who supported keeping indefinitely blocked. Jclemens (talk) 03:39, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
- Alleged self-plagiarism by Bruno Frey and others (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The admission of self-plagiarism is adequately covered in the article on Bruno Frey. This article places undue emphasis on the issue and suffers from recentism. NtheP (talk) 21:08, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}. |
- Delete This is considerably longer than the article on Bruno Frey himself. The author might more usefully demonstrate his close and extensive interest in Prof Frey by expanding on the substance of his writings whilst demonstrating a neutral point of view. The issue of self-plagiarism certainly does not merit an article of its own - as things stand the issue arguably gets disproportionate space in the Frey article itself. --AJHingston (talk) 23:30, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
- Merge - merge useful content and expand the main article. Being publicly reprimanded in one of the leading economics journal is big and unprecedented, as is a prominent economist being caught for academic dishonesty. While other disciplines had its fair share of such scandals, this might the first such scandal in economics that involves a prominent member of the profession. This fork might be overkill, but some content should be merged to the main article. Stepopen (talk) 11:21, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
- Strong Keep - this is probably the most notable case of plagiarism to have hit the academe within the last decade. It's not only Frey (a potential Nobel Prize winner) who's involved, but dozens of co-authors from universities like Harvard and MIT to Zurich. The article definitely needs work, and as of now there aren't many reliable sources (there are certainly issues surrounding WP:BLP in the article). But the significance of the topic matter is not in doubt. I am commenting on an alternate account for fears of retribution from the persons involved in this case. I have read Wikipedia policies on this matter and will be in full compliance with them. Invisible Hands (talk) 13:51, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:59, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:59, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
- delete only this section:Alleged_self-plagiarism_by_Bruno_Frey_and_others#First_reports_of_self-plagiarism_and_subsequent_reprimand is properly sourced and npov. the rest of the article under discussion seems to be an amalgam of original research and synthesis and it lacks reliable sources (econjobrumors.com indeed). the good material in the first section is already present in the version of the main bruno frey article that predates the version made by creator of this one copying this entire article into that one. — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 15:55, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
- Delete (do not merge): poorly sourced and synthy piece about a LP. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:25, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
- Strong Keep: this page details facts. Additional references are needed. The information that is provided is necessary to understand the debate on self-plagiarism. No statements are original research, all statements by academic economists, all conclusions are made elsewhere. All statements are properly sourced (although some links to the original sources are missing as of yet). Please substantiate claims of OR. Please view page ratings. Olaf Storbeck is a journalist for the Handelsblatt newspaper with a circulation of 145.000 copies and he translates his own published articles to English. The WSJ is not the primary source, it summarizes Handelsblatt journalism. In his comments on the WSJ blog[1], Storbeck credits Econjobrumors and Gelman for discovering the issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HansKeppel (talk • contribs) 19:45, 28 August 2011 (UTC) — HansKeppel (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Delete, OR/attack page. Hairhorn (talk) 20:55, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Attack page. OR and OSYN. Matter is dealt with in BLP. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:45, 28 August 2011 (UTC).
- 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.