Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Errors of impunity

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 no consensus. W.marsh 18:26, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Errors of impunity

This is original research and is based on passages of book authored by the editor who created the article – possible self-promotion. The term is possibly a neologism, although legal lingo may be different in the United States (usually the term "error of law" is used in relation to appeals, not "errors of impunity". Originally had a {{prod}} tag, but it was removed without explanation. Agent 86 21:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Certaintly article created by author of book -- published by Cambridge University Press, hardly a vanity outfit! If this phrase is in use in discussions of law, we should have an article on it. Sdedeo (tips) 22:09, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, and per "Errors of justice" above. Tevildo 23:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. It describes notable original research but in a manner that I think is sufficiently NPOV. That it's from a CUP book makes this seem more than just a passing neologism. In addition, the article is well written and well referenced. Interlingua ^talk 23:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Not exactly a neologism, as the book, itself is nearly notable, but the definition is not standard (and, as far as I can tell, not used except by the author.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:03, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. If needed, move information to an article about the book or the author. Sophy's Duckling 18:42, 16 June 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.