Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyber-dissident

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Hermione1980 18:36, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cyber-dissident

decdif WCFrancis 04:09, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete.I wonder what a "decdif is" dectionary Difinition, ha! --.::Imdaking::. Bow | DOWN 04:26, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Please have mercy on my ignorance. I'm a new Wikipedia contributor, and I don't quite understand why the Cyber-dissident stub that I created is unacceptable. Could someone explain this? Many thanks! Deborah Elizabeth Finn
  • Keep and expand. Quite well-known term, article has content. Perhaps nominator would expand reasons for nomination? Dlyons493 07:22, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
    • If you check the article history, you'll see that it was a bare-bones dicdef at the time of nomination; however, Deborah Elizabeth Finn has expanded it quite nicely. Keep. DS 13:22, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
    • That explains it. Shows the tension between trying to catch rubbish early and allowing stubs to evolve. Is there a case for a new article be given, say, a day to see if it's going anywhere before being afd'd? I've seen an afd being applied literally minutes after creation! Dlyons493 14:13, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
      • For one, you get 5 days before any AfD takes effect (barring a speedy). Plenty of articles get rescued like this one. It also suggests that, in general, articles should be created with at least a moderate amount of content. — Lomn | Talk / RfC 18:48, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Expand - might be of interest. Some names would be good, or "martyrs", rather than just a definition. --MacRusgail 13:38, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Obvious Keep. --Mysidia (talk) 23:24, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. We already have dissident. This is just Internetcruft. / -Peter Isotalo 04:39, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Given where the article has been taken, this has clear encyclopedic value. As a concept, it is a distinct category of dissident and deserves its own article. Justin Bacon 06:49, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Thanks to Deborah Elizabeth Finn and welcome to Wikipedia, Deborah. It seems a worthwhile subject for an article given the explosion in Iranian blogging for example and Salam Pax in Iraq. Capitalistroadster 06:11, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, manifestly will evolve and is obviously a key term. Sjc 06:12, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Many of the delete reasons given above are reasons for the article to be marked {{cleanup}} or {{attention}}, not {{afd}} or {{delete}}. ··gracefool |☺ 17:51, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. This is the first page in a history that's still in the writing. ldm 14.10 27 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, merge the contents with dissident and make a redirect. IMHO cyber-dissident is just a subset of dissidents. --Kubieziel 14:38, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. The difference between using cyberspace techniques on one hand, or using "meat space" techniques on the other hand is significant enough to justify two separate articles for cyber-dissidents and other dissidents. TenthServant 22:46, 27 September 2005 (UTC) User's only edit. Hermione1980 18:36, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. LouisGodena User has no contributions. Hermione1980 18:36, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. and Expand. My vote concerns the fact that this is a timely topic, and one that is likely to even more relevant and important in the very near future; EnglishN 19:18, 27 September 2005 User has no contributions. Hermione1980 18:36, 2 October 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.