Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electric bicycle laws

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 was keep and cleanup. JPD (talk) 11:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Electric bicycle laws

Extremely unencyclopedic. Wikipedia is not a collection of laws, which is essentially what this article is. Talking about the laws is fine for us. Literally publishing them is not. Woohookitty^(meow) 06:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Essentially law-listcruft.

take note : The above unsigned vote is from the new user "NeoNitrde"[1] He only has 33 edits[2] which most of them where done voting for deletions on October 11th, the same time this article was nominated for deletion --CyclePat 15:31, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

• Mercilessly edit. Remove all extracts from statutes. The author has done a lot of work and is recommended to create a specific wiki on Wikia or http://editthis.info . -- RHaworth 06:31, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Agree with RHaworth - cutting out the statutes and summarizing the highlights will be much more useful to a general audience. Lord Rasputin 17:13, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I knew this nomination was going happen! I Agree with RHworth, but we should not remove "ALL". I have done some pretty dandy work on the Ontario Laws. I know for a fact their are some good sources hidden in the laws that where essentially dumped here! I personnaly try to reference the laws with news articles. For example I have a news article laminated on my wall with the new laws and my picture. (I made 3rd page in the Ottawa Sun). So we should comb through the information and remove, probably, most of the laws that where essentially just dumped into here. However we should try to keep from losing these IMPORTANT references; which unfortunatelly wasn't properly cited. (One reason I've been a little despaired) I'm actually debating if this is a bad faith nomination to only incite someone to clean up the article in a hurry. If so, I think that is bad. --CyclePat 01:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • No it is not a bad faith nomination. It's a terrible, terrible, terrible Wikipedia article. As I've stated to you and others in the past, the articles on here need to be ABOUT the laws, not the actual laws themselves. Our general practice is to talk about a law and then provide a link to the full text of the law at the bottom of the page. It's not to include extensive extracts of the law itself. --Woohookitty^(meow) 08:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep, maybe merge badly written articles are not a reason for deletion. It needs help from a good editor and expert, but articles on classes of laws are fairly notable. Perhaps a merge into a large article on Transportation Laws might be better, but its got potential... --Jayron32 06:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • We have an electric bicycle article. The laws article was essentially a fork from the electric bicycle article. It could be merged into that article...remerged. --Woohookitty^(meow) 08:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
    • NO! absolutely not. This shouldn't be merged. Electric Bicycle laws is a large section of electric bicycles wich ironically is a subdivision of "motorized bicycles." As you may have noticed "Electric bicycle laws" article is big. It would be illogical at this point to try and merge all this information into electric bicycles (which is huge as is). I was actually thinking we could split the US, Canada and other countries to have their own article. Frankly I don't appreciate having this discussion here. I can see what you are trying to do. I appreciate the fact that this article needs to be cleaned but deleting sourced information is totally contrary to keeping a well balanced WP:POV article. (Essential NPOV) Please do not merge or delete. This article only needs a good cleaning. If you have the time please take a look at this youtube video we just uploaded in regards to the laws in Ontario. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U54U3i_dK0U --CyclePat 17:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Furthermore, I would like to add that doing a quick search on google give approx. 47000 hits for "electric bicycle" law.[3] --CyclePat 23:10, 12 October 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.