Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gabriel Mouton

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was KEEP. -Splash 02:09, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gabriel Mouton

This article needs too much work to live. At a minimum it should discuss or at least list all the proposed units, relate them to the earlier units they correspond to and the later units that adopted the concept, speak to why its decimal and related to an arc of the earths great circle, who Mouton was involved with as regards his astronomy, what problems he worked on as a mathematician, how his contemporaries received his ideas and what the connection is to measurements of the earth and the metric system.Rktect 21:45, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep I don't know if having once tagged it I'm allowed to untag it, but I went into the article and, despite that it took some work, corrected some of the more glaring mistakes such as those regarding Mouton and the second pendulum using "Klein World of Measurement" and then added Klein as a reference.Rktect 18:48, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Rktext, you have tagged this article as disputed, but have yet to discuss your reasons on the article's discussion page. VfD is not the place to dispute any shortcomings - until you have had a chance to explain / discuss the disputate. Ian Cairns 00:01, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

• My origiinal reason was, that as others have noted, the facts were wrong, but I do agree that now that the worst of Egil's errors are corrected it can stay.Rktect 18:48, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. However, this article should contain information about Mouton, not Rktect's personal theories and original research about the entire history of measurements. Gene Nygaard

• • I don't think citing a standard reference work that is in it's fifth printing is original research but in case you want to check me out, every fact I added can be found in Klein, mostly from Chapter 9 pp 105-115 Rktect 18:48, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

• Speedy keep, I see no assertions that would make me think this article does not belong in Wikipedia. Ken ^{talk|contribs} 14:46, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

• Undecided. I wrote this (up to today), and spent some effort researching it, but as things are now developing, I think I would rather see it deleted. As it is, it serves no purpose other than wasting time and effort. -- Egil 14:50, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, because VfD is not cleanup. Mouton appears to be a notable mathematician, and is part of the ancestry of the metric system; an article about him would be encyclopedic. A random reference: [1] Nandesuka 15:48, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Delete. The problem is that the Wikipedia system as is makes cleanup impossible (kindly ask me by email why that is the case). So, in my mind, Wikipedia is much better off with this article (and many others) deleted than leaving them open to contributions from those who do not fit the assumption that people are reasonable and have good intentions, but are also not 100% vandals. -- Egil 17:26, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup is not impossible. It's not even particularly difficult. Try harder. I find that if you're right, you will quickly accrue co-editors who will help you reach (and implement) consensus. Nandesuka 05:22, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I have tried this route for a month, and now given up. Wikipedia style "consensus" has been reached in VfD after VfD, but the only result is that the "problem" moves to new articles. Real "consensus" requires that the parties accept the outcome - when this is not the case the concept fails. -- Egil 09:14, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. The problem here is not with the article, but with Rktect and his agenda. Pburka 18:17, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep and cleanup. Notable mathematician for his role in the metric system. Capitalistroadster 19:57, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup. VfD is not the place to complain about article quality. Sdedeo 20:12, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, clean up. --Finbarr Saunders 20:56, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy keep and cleanup, bad faith nomination, since Rktect is in a running feud with Egil. Full disclosure: supposedly I am a minion of Egil, even though we have never spoken to each other. Zoe 22:17, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. This VfD is a waste of time. Paul August ☎ 02:06, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep inches are still better. Klonimus 18:08, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Article looks fine to me. Gandalf61 12:46, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. wow, you mean we could have had a system that made sense? linas 23:58, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup. Mostly typos and layout issues. Ian Cairns 06:39, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.