| Revision as of 16:44, 20 June 2007 editEvouga (talk | contribs)156 edits →[]← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:37, 20 June 2007 edit undoTenPoundHammer (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers278,884 edits →[]: commentNext edit → | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| *'''Speedy Keep'''. per comment. Notable government wiki. --] 14:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC) | *'''Speedy Keep'''. per comment. Notable government wiki. --] 14:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :Sites with no sources don't deserve articles. That's why we deleted Encyclopedia of Stupid and Encyclopedia Dramatica and all that other non-notable crap. ] 14:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC) | :Sites with no sources don't deserve articles. That's why we deleted Encyclopedia of Stupid and Encyclopedia Dramatica and all that other non-notable crap. ] 14:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ::Misplaced Pages pages with no sources should be ''sourced'', not necessarily ''deleted''. ] • <sup>(((] • ])))</sup> 17:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. Non notable per above. It's also not a government wiki. ] • ] 16:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC) | *'''Delete'''. Non notable per above. It's also not a government wiki. ] • ] 16:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep'''. Article already lists two sources and more can be found (ie in Social Computing Magazine). A poor article should be improved, not deleted. ] 16:44, 20 June 2007 (UTC) | *'''Keep'''. Article already lists two sources and more can be found (ie in Social Computing Magazine). A poor article should be improved, not deleted. ] 16:44, 20 June 2007 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 17:37, 20 June 2007
Jurispedia
Short, unsourced article on website with no claims to notability. Wyington Duarm 21:39, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per nom, no sources. Mynglestine 04:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 10:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep This is called judging a book by it's cover. I hadn't heard of Jurispedia until the article, but it's obvious that the short text will increase. The website is "inspired by Misplaced Pages" and copies its format; surfing to it is like ending up in a parallel universe run by attorneys.
However, unlike a lot of other sites that take a Wiki article verbatim and call it their own, Jurispedia at least acknowledges that it's imitating Wiki. I can only surmise that the reason that Wiki hasn't sued Jurispedia is that this legal research site got permission. Or Misplaced Pages overlooks these things "pro bono" (for the greater good). Mandsford 11:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. Ok, that may have been a joke, but since you're a relatively new user, Mandsford, I feel compelled to mention the policy on copyrights in case it wasn't and you actually don't realize the wide freedom to reuse content granted by Misplaced Pages's GFDL licensing. Pinball22 14:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep. per comment. Notable government wiki. --Edtropolis 14:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sites with no sources don't deserve articles. That's why we deleted Encyclopedia of Stupid and Encyclopedia Dramatica and all that other non-notable crap. Mynglestine 14:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages pages with no sources should be sourced, not necessarily deleted. Ten Pound Hammer • 17:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Non notable per above. It's also not a government wiki. Arkyan • 16:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Article already lists two sources and more can be found (ie in Social Computing Magazine). A poor article should be improved, not deleted. Evouga 16:44, 20 June 2007 (UTC)