Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Networks and partnerships

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. CDC (talk) 21:21, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Networks and partnerships

Unencyclopedic and original research. This page may also have been already deleted yesterday. Delete JeremyA 03:06, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

The page was not deleted merely modified to make it more encyclopedic.Leave[[User:Aldreds|Scot Aldred]

• Delete. Reads like an internal HR Memo more than an encyclopedia article. Scimitar 15:02, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Delete non-encyclopedic Bgeer 16:09, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Could have been speedy deleted as nonsense. Plus, it's probably a copyvio too. ~leif ☺ _(talk) 22:40, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I have a problem with this comment. While I agree that this is original work from my students it is in no way a copyright violation and the suggestion that this is the case is insulting and defamitory. I would also like to draw this person's attention to the following rules of Wikipedia which appear to have been ignored on the Wikipedia link he has included to his wikipedia home page:

• Please do not bite the newcomers
• Don't create articles about yourself
• Don't insert links to your own home pageScot Aldred

• Everyone is free to put what they want (within reason) on their user page. This is not your user page. Etacar11 04:05, 26 May 2005 (UTC)ThanksScot Aldred

• Delete pointless, unencyclopedic. - Etacar11 23:19, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
• Please explain how this is unencylopedic--is it that there are too few links to other parts of Wikipedia? I've looked at the guidelines and fail to see how this is unencyclopedic.Scot Aldred

• It's just not something anyone is likely to look up (in my opinion). Nothing personal. Not to mention it violates Wikipedia:No_original_research Etacar11 04:05, 26 May 2005 (UTC)ThanksScot Aldred

• Not an encyclopedia article. Delete. - Mike Rosoft 15:36, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
• CLEAN UP Dissenting voices have a point -- unencyclopedic as written... however, a topic of great interest to individuals in the jobs markets, in both the public and private sectors, especially as the years acrue and one's resume lengthens. There is merit here, if not great presentation. It should be perhaps considered a long stub that needs a good experienced editor working with the author to achieve a better wikientry. The topic is both modern and needed by many. There have to be half a hundred biz books dealing with Networking, mentoring, et al. so there are references both popular and acedemic to round this out. Fabartus 21:10, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.