Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Basong

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 DELETE, copyvio, afd, whichever. -Splash^talk 01:10, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Basong

Copyvio from [1], and non-notable, with no hits in Wall St Journal in past ten years. | Keithlaw (talk) (contribs) 00:36, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

• This is Articles for deletion. Wikipedia:Copyright problems is across the quad. Uncle G 00:41, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Thanks, although as you can see in my summary, it's quite deletable on NN itself. I've blanked the article w/a copyvio notice. | Keithlaw [[User_talk:Keithlaw|(talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Keithlaw|(contribs)]] 03:09, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: If nobody claims permission in 7 days on the copyright problems page, it is just deleted without the need for the discussion required on AfD. Most articles are deleted without challenge. Since it is easier to delete the article this way, copyvios are only sent to AfD if someone claims to have permission and we don't want the article. -- Kjkolb 04:10, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Blatant copyvio advert. Even if they have permission, I don't think we'd want the article. Let's do AFD anyway. It'll be gone 2 days earlier. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:29, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Handling it as a copyright violation means that it is gone now. See the article. This is why one should use Copyright Judo against copyrighted advertisements. Uncle G 16:16, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
    • So what has to happen for the article to be deleted? Obviously the text is gone, but other than listing in on Wikipedia:Copyright problems, is there something else to be done? | Keithlaw 18:36, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
      • Discuss the case if it is claimed that the text is GFDL licensed, and wait for the normal copyright problems closure process to deal with the article. (If one is an administrator, one can help with that process, once the lag time has passed.) Uncle G 19:28, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete completely, instead of having a page that the original is a copyvio ad. HGB 19:04, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
  • This is the normal functioning of our Wikipedia:Copyright problems process. Please familiarize yourself with the way that copyright problems are deleted. Uncle G 19:28, 15 November 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.