Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sphaera Mundi

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 of the debate was closed. Eligible for speedy deletion at request of author, and has been rewritten without reliance on original text at De sphaera mundi; this article now redirects there. --Michael Snow 05:25, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sphaera Mundi

This article is copied from my wiki but does not contain a proper attribution notice (e.g. "This article is based on the JnanaBase article Sphaera Mundi, used under the GFDL" with an external link to the source. I consider this to be plagiarism and violation of academic standards of citation and attribution, as well as a breach of the GFDL licence. Furthermore, it is against the Wikipedia:Cite sources policy which states "What are references good for? Giving credit to a source for providing useful information. Avoiding claims of plagiarism or intellectual dishonesty." When a third-party website copies Wikipedia content, you require a GFDL notice and a link back to Wikipedia. We require the same. Moreover, another user says the article should be improved. Please delete the article or add a proper attribution notice with a link back to the source. Www.wikinerds.org 02:20, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Fix any alleged problems. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-08-15 02:38
• no vote Voters may wish to bear in mind that this is part of a broader matter being addressed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/UninvitedCompany 2. For my part, I speedied the article earlier since User:www.wikinerds.org is the sole author who has contributed anything of significance to the article, and since he had requested deletion on my talk page. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 02:54, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
• No vote. I've re-added the citation to avoid any copyvio allegations in the short term. However, it turns out that this is part of a larger ongoing edit war (see the article edit history and talk page). There are also related issues being discussed at WP:RfC. --Alan Au 03:30, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect' Why not merge/redirect to the author Johannes de Sacrobosco and amplify details of the text there? Dottore So 04:11, 15 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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.