Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Resource-based economy
- 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 speedy delete. Deleted as a copyright violation, (and, in my opinion it was in any case a totally unencyclopedic essay) This is not in prejudice of a proper article on the subject, if a non-violating article with reliable third party source can be written DGG ( talk ) 20:28, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
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}} . |
- Resource-based economy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Obvious self promotional spam article that has only one biased source and was likely copied from the organization's website. The creator and trademark owner of "Resource Based Economies", Jacque Fresco already has his own article as well as additional articles for his organizations The Venus Project and The Zeitgeist Movement which are all pretty much the same thing repeated multiple times anyway. Grandthefttoaster (talk) 08:20, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The article was copied word for word from an essay on the organization's website. http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_kb&task=article&article=1&Itemid=100091 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.153.79.136 (talk) 18:52, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Indeed it was. Flagged as copyvio. Suggest speedy delete on that ground. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 19:59, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The article was copied word for word from an essay on the organization's website. http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_kb&task=article&article=1&Itemid=100091 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.153.79.136 (talk) 18:52, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Reads like an essay. We're not here to be a soapbox. Shadowjams (talk) 08:42, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - There's absolutely no justification for deleting this article, if it has grammatical errors, fix them. If you don't approve of the specific language used, alter it. Why not just nominate all articles for deletion if it "reads like an essay" while you're at it. I suspect whoever nominated this article for deletion simply doesn't like the ideas. Censorship at its finest. 206.125.139.238 (talk) 13:02, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. An essay of original research, containing editorial musings about a utopian economy. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:47, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete - copyvio, see above. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 20:05, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep - There are plenty of other sources to add, based on a 2-second Google search. Fresco, The Zeitgeist Movement and Resource-Based Economy are all noteworthy enough to warrant dedicated articles. I've frequently seen articles with a lot less noteworthiness than this. Autonova (talk) 18:10, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep - Article needs more sources and a better structure but should not be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.7.194.69 (talk) 18:48, 7 May 2010 (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.