Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alien Assault Traders

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 keep. Johnleemk | Talk 13:31, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alien Assault Traders

Delete I am the original author of said page and no longer wish to have this article listed. Only changes in history log are with external links and catagories. Drmike 16:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

• Comment — Do you have a valid reason why it should be deleted? Thanks. — RJH 16:29, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment — I gave one. I no longer wish to have my work used here. If you wish to have an article on AAT, feel free to write your own. Program is also not notable and only has a small fanbase. --Drmike 16:34, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Keep — I don't believe that being the author of an article is a valid reason for an AfD nomination. It should only be based on the content. Please see Wikipedia:Deletion policy. Thanks. :) — RJH 18:47, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. People come and go, but we can't delete what they've done when they decide to leave. And by contributing, an author automatically agrees to the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, so one can't argue use without permission. So I see no reason to delete. The page looks pretty good too. --Esprit15d 16:46, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. People can't request their work to be deleted because they feel like it. According to CSD G7 the page can be speedy deleted "provided the page was (...) mistakenly created". This is not the case here. Punkmorten 17:06, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
• It was mistakenly created. I have found too many places on the net where my work is being used without credit. I thought you folks respected copyright. My mistake. --Drmike 17:29, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

• We respect copyright, but all Wikipedia contributions are licensed under GFDL, to which you agreed to by submitting said content in the first place. I'm going to vote Delete on non-notability, though. --Agamemnon2 13:50, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Wikipedia isn't responsible for the actions of other sites. You should have read the warnings. Golfcam 17:47, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Esprit15d and Golfcam, but rewrite to wikify and to remove Drmike's direct phrasing, fix misspelling "accumilated", and expand to demonstrate notability. (Delete if notability can't be shown.) I don't see any POV material surviving that needs to be deleted. Barno 21:05, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Stifle 16:54, 18 January 2006 (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.