Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Atlas Shrugged

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page is preserved as an archive of the associated article page's "votes for deletion" debate (the forerunner of articles for deletion). Please do not modify this page, nor delete it as an orphaned talk page.

From VfD, December 5[edit]

  • Synopsis of Atlas Shrugged, Chapters 1-5, Synopsis of Atlas Shrugged, Chapters 6-10, Synopsis of Atlas Shrugged, Section2, Synopsis of Atlas Shrugged, Section 2A, Synopsis of Atlas Shrugged, Section 3, Synopsis of Atlas Shrugged, Section 3A, Structure of Atlas Shrugged - Wikipedia is not the place for such indepth analysis. These articles should be deleted from here and posted at wikibooks. Kingturtle 04:55, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • m:Transwiki? -- Cyan 05:04, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • delete or move DJ Clayworth 18:10, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • Move to Wikisource or Wikibooks. --YACHT 09:09, Dec 11, 2003 (UTC)
    • delete - Mark Ryan 12:23, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete. If I'm not mistaken, there are about 1000 articles dealing with every single character and plot point in every Ayn Rand book, nearly none of which deserve an encyclopedia entry. Tempshill 19:06, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)
      • I think efforts were made to move them into pages such as Minor Characters in Atlas Shrugged, which are incredibly long and contain such character as waiter: "The Waiter serves drinks to the Looters in section 131. " Maximus Rex 06:47, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete, but before deleting move the content to some other place such as wikibooks, or transwiki, or even meta since someone certainly spent a lot of time writing it. Maximus Rex 06:47, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree, please move somewhere before deleting. This could be a good starting point for the first Wikibook equivalent of Cliffs Notes. --Delirium 00:39, Dec 9, 2003 (UTC)
    • Good book. Save content (under the primary author's user pages would be fine) and delete. Daniel Quinlan 04:29, Dec 10, 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete - Do NOT move to Wikisource- this is not source text. I don't know much about Wikibooks, but I don't believe book synopses are appropriate there. The user namespace is not for storing such things so do not move there either. Just delete. Angela. 05:45, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • I couldn't care less about the book personally, but it seems a shame to delete so much work. The consensus seems to be that it doesn't belong in the main namespace, but can't it go somewhere?
    • There's no currently appropriate wikibook, but I could see this as useful for a future one. Any analysis of the book, or of Ayn Rand's works in general, could use a decent synopsis to work from. --Delirium 09:05, Dec 10, 2003 (UTC)
    • Keep. I really don't see "being too in-depth" as being a solid reason for deletion. The amount of text is relatively tiny compared with the overall size of Wikipedia, so its not a technical issue. So the only issue at hand is a credibility issue - YMMV but I do not think we should delete valid content simply because we suffer a tiny dent in credibility because our coverage depth is not uniform across topic areas. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 11:34, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
      • NB the above comment doesn't mean refactoring into fewer articles wouldn't be welcome if someone wants to do it. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 11:34, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • In an e-mail with Zanimum, I learned about Wikibooks, the textbook project. While there's currently just books being prepared on selected standards, so far Shakespeare, Sherlock, and The Once and Future King, the articles on Atlas Shrugged could be turned into a classroom text.
    • Keep. Deleting this stuff seems like a terrible waste. Can't you find somewhere on wikibooks for it? JackLynch 05:07, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • Look at this Wiki is not paper JackLynch 08:17, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete. Move to wikibooks, and place a link to it from the main article.
    • These are all relevant to Atlas Shrugged, so even if it is decided that the information is badly organised or whatever, the pages should be redirected to that article. This enables people to make use of the material later on by looking in the histories. There is no reason to delete the information altogether. -- Oliver P. 18:12, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
      • As per Oliver's suggestion, I have redirected the Synopses to Atlas Shrugged. If someone wants to copy them to Wikibooks, please do. Angela. 01:50, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Angela, The votes were overwhelmingly in favor of deleting, and only one person out of 18 suggested turning them into redirects. Redirects are useful tools when they involve words or phrases that users might enter as searches. What users is going to sit down and search for Synopsis of Atlas Shrugged, Chapters 1-5?

These should be deleted, and NOT turned into redirects. Sincerely, Kingturtle 01:57, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

A lot of people suggested moving elsewhere though, rather than discarding the information completely. I don't think I actually commented on this one, but that was my opinion too. So in this case, the purpose of the redirect is to preserve the edit history. Onebyone 02:30, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Only three people voted to delete this outright. The rest said to move it, but out of the eleven people that suggested it be moved, not a single one of them actually bothered to do so. I don't feel it should be moved, so I was obviously not going to do that. As a temporary measure, I followed Oliver's suggestion that it be redirected and suggested on the talk page that if someone wants to do that then they should. Once it is moved, it can be deleted instantly as per guideline 8 on the criteria for speedy deletion on the deletion policy page, but until then, it can't just sit on VfD forever on the off chance that someone is actually going to move it. Angela. 02:45, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

summary of the votes

  • Move: Kingturtle, Cyan, Yacht, Maximus Rex, Delirium, Daniel Quinlan, Anon, Anon2
  • Delete or move: DJ Clayworth
  • Delete, move and redirect: Oliver P
  • Delete: Mark Ryan, Tempshill, Angela.
  • Keep: Pete/Pcb21
  • Keep or move: JackLynch
I have copied the articles in question into wikibooks, see . Maybe it can take root there. I fully understand the desire to find a home for all the hard work put into said articles. However, I don't think improper redirects should be a repository for such things. I think it is better to hold such info in a sub page of some sort. In any case, the info has been duplicated in Wikibook...and maybe it can develop a life there.
P.S. in the vote results listed above, I am incorrectly listed under "Move." In my nomination, I specifically said "These articles should be deleted from here." Kingturtle 03:00, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I counted you as a "move" because you said These articles should be deleted from here and posted at wikibooks. Kingturtle 04:55, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC), which is not an outright delete. It implies that you wouldn't want it deleted unless it was moved. Anyway, I've deleted the redirects now. Angela. 03:04, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)