Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Infraction: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→[[infraction]]: this nomination was not political, I don't understand how it could be political |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
*'''Delete''' unless article is expanded. --[[User:Fuzzball!|Fuzzball!]] [[User_talk:Fuzzball!|(talk)]] 01:56, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''' unless article is expanded. --[[User:Fuzzball!|Fuzzball!]] [[User_talk:Fuzzball!|(talk)]] 01:56, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' You are going to have to delete all of the other legal definitions if you want to get rid of this one. The motivation for deletion here is political, so be honest about it.[[User:Mlorrey|Mlorrey]] 05:02, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' You are going to have to delete all of the other legal definitions if you want to get rid of this one. The motivation for deletion here is political, so be honest about it.[[User:Mlorrey|Mlorrey]] 05:02, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC) |
||
**Not only is the nomination not political, I honestly don't understand how it could be. I landed on this page after following the random page link, saw it was nothing more than a dictionary definition. Following a quick google search nothing suggested to me any potential to expand it into an encyclopædia article and so I nominated it for deletion. I haven't read any of the other legal definition articles so I can't comment on them. [[User:Thryduulf|Thryduulf]] 11:24, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Merge/redirect''' into legal context. [[User:Radiant!| ]][[User_talk:Radiant!|Radiant]][[meta:mergist|_*]] 08:16, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC) |
*'''Merge/redirect''' into legal context. [[User:Radiant!| ]][[User_talk:Radiant!|Radiant]][[meta:mergist|_*]] 08:16, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 11:24, 6 April 2005
This is a dictionary definition, and I don't see how it can be expanded to be more than this. Thryduulf 10:19, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Week keep, since it appears as a term of legal art in Bouvier's Law Dictionary. Gazpacho 14:06, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete - it's a dicdef of legal art. -- 8^D BDAbramsongab 22:18, 2005 Apr 5 (UTC)
- Delete unless article is expanded. --Fuzzball! (talk) 01:56, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Keep You are going to have to delete all of the other legal definitions if you want to get rid of this one. The motivation for deletion here is political, so be honest about it.Mlorrey 05:02, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Not only is the nomination not political, I honestly don't understand how it could be. I landed on this page after following the random page link, saw it was nothing more than a dictionary definition. Following a quick google search nothing suggested to me any potential to expand it into an encyclopædia article and so I nominated it for deletion. I haven't read any of the other legal definition articles so I can't comment on them. Thryduulf 11:24, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Merge/redirect into legal context. Radiant_* 08:16, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)