This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles University of Oxford This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

Yesterday a freshly-created account, @ Alumcheck added a series of citations to Mr. Lowe's work, which were promptly reverted by @ EasyAsPai. I have two concerns:

• there is no support at all for almost the entire Cases section, and the reverted edits just continued this pattern
• the disputed text also included some publications by Mr. Lowe. I would think that a publication can be used as a citation for its own existence (but not for notability) under a liberal reading of WP:SELFSOURCE. As far as I'm concerned, @ Alumcheck can add back self-published articles and books.

With respect to the Cases section, my recommendation would be to either:

• Option 1 delete the entire cases section
• Option 2 delete only the cases which are not linked to another article (although I can't say Mr. Vaughn is mentioned in those articles and I'm not going to do it right now)

Almost a year ago, I made the following observation which I think remains true today: "this is an exceptionally poorly cited article, but probably not a a candidate for deletion as he meets NPROF due to professorial chair. The case citation section should probably be deleted as it's only supported by a self-published source." The events of yesterday only reinforce the lack of verifiability of the majority of this article.

If there are no concerns/comments within a reasonable period I'm likely to proceed with Option 1 -- this article has to follow the same rules as any other, and WP:RS and WP:BLP are not being honored. Oblivy ( talk) 01:41, 18 June 2024 (UTC) reply

I've taken the step of deleting all the unsourced material, leaving the publications.and a small amount of biographical information which is available from the Oxford website. The publications are probably self-authenticating, but licensing history and history of arbitral appointments are not. Oblivy ( talk) 01:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Pinging @ Vlowe to alert them to this thread involving edits by @ Alumcheck in case they aren't aware. Oblivy ( talk) 11:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Copyright status of the image looks problematic. Alumcheck updated it as own work, but recorded it as by a portrait painter, Simon Davis. So unless Alumcheck is Davis, this should probably be removed. Tacyarg ( talk) 11:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Agreed. The image has a 7-day countdown on commons which ends around the 8th, after which it will be deleted, but no objection to removing it now as it's unlikely to be Alumcheck's IP. Oblivy ( talk) 11:41, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply