Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Removal from the Order of Canada

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

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. Dmcdevit·t 23:22, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Removal from the Order of Canada

Should be merged with Order of Canada. EvilPhoenix talk 09:02, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

  • Merger does not involve deleting articles at any stage. If you want an article merged, merge it. Don't nominate it for deletion. If you want to warn people about an impending merger, use the tags that are there for the purpose, not {{subst:vfd}}. Uncle G 11:49, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge as above. Keep as expanded 23skidoo 12:02, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
  • MergeYoungamerican 14:42, 14 July 2005 (UTC) Keep as expandedYoungamerican 13:22, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. I am in the middle of expanding the article, and I mainly created it as a fork, since I do not want to overload the main article with stuff about the removal process. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 16:10, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Order of Canada is already big enough. --Scimitar parley 16:44, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Moved to Removal from the Order of Canada. The article has been expanded since the nomination. This article, and the Order of Canada article are each long enough to stand on their own. Merging them would likely exceed the recommended length for Wikipedia articles. What is the solution for over-sized articles? Create a branch article! Keep. Ground Zero 18:16, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as per Ground Zero. •Zhatt• 18:45, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep after Ground Zero --Simon.Pole 19:07, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge with Order of Canada because of how closely related the subject matter is. If that article is too long, maybe it could be split up on different criteria, perhaps "Order of Canada membership" for eligibility, removal, and notable members. Peter Grey 19:28, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
    • There is a page/list all of the Companions of the Order. Of course, there is a lot more Members and Officers than what we listed, but we could create pages for that (but with my luck, they will wind up on here like other stuff I put my hand on recently). As for the eligability, that can also be an article by itself too, since I finally located the Order Constitution (can that be created, then sent to Wikisource?) Zscout370 (Sound Off) 19:55, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Not the list, a new article on membership criteria etc. Peter Grey 21:34, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
      • I can see what I can do. I need to expand this a bit more (mainly in the Ahenakew section) and see if there are other members of the Order who are facing calls for removal. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:46, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, per Ground Zero. CJCurrie 20:22, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep per Zscout and Ground Zero. Main article is much too large to merge into. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 21:10, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep this is a very notable article and stands to be expanded greatly. to many people in canada, these events were as big news as the presidential impeachment was to americans. --jonasaurus 21:25, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge as per Evilphoenix with Order of Canada. Besides, Jonasaurus should know that in 1868 the OoC didn't exist. brenneman(t)(c) 00:51, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as the article has been expanded and improved. EvilPhoenix talk 04:18, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
    • So, does this mean the VFD stops? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 04:23, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
    • I don't believe so. Although it has consensus and the nominator votes keep, it has to "serve its time". In case a horde of maple-syrup-hating Wikipedians come and vote delete, as it were. And Nixon was never impeached. brenneman(t)(c) 04:58, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
      • Because he resigned before he could do it. But back to this vote, I still have one question: for those agreeing with Evilpheonix to redirect, what will happen with their votes since Evil, the nominator, voted keep? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 05:01, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Well, so far Keep is outvoting Merge pretty hardcore, so I'd say the article is pretty safe. As the argument has been made that Order of Canada is sizable enough as is, I imagine that the closing admin (who will decide the vote) will agree that the consensus is for keep. Good work on the article, btw. EvilPhoenix talk 05:18, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge as above. Radiant_>|< 08:50, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge Information on the individual to the individual's article page on the circumstance of the removal from the Order of Canada. Keep the Order of Canada page clean with just a reference to individuals removed and if necessary a separate article on the process for removal from the Order of Canada. To enter information regarding the circumstance of the removals will not do justice to this prestigious Order. Receiving the Order of Canada is great and wonderful thing; it's the individual that should bear the burden of humiliation. IMHO HJKeats 04:05, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
This is what the article is about: the process for removal, the two folks who were removed and one person who is facing calls for removal. Of course, we have a reference to Eagleson and Ahenakew in the main OoC article, but I wanted to branch out this aticle, since the removal of a person from the Order is rare and a lot of what happens when someone is removed was discussed recently due to Ahenakew's removal. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 04:10, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
I wish to thank Zscout370 for his effort and dillegence on this article. Just to clarify my position, I just wanted to suggest that the controversy for the removal of individuals to not tarnish the Order because of their actions. The Removal from the Order of Canada article is fine and should stay, Keep. The merge I suggested was to merge information into the individuals article, which I belive is already in progress. HJKeats 00:51, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. -- Spinboy 05:41, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. --Dhodges 00:07, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Articles need to be kept to a reasonable size. CanadianCaesar 20:53, 27 July 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.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/r/t/Wikipedia%7EArticles_for_deletion_Removal_from_the_Order_of_Canada_3343.html"