Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Primary Fundamental Right

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 delete. Wikiacc (talk) 20:42, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Primary Fundamental Right

• Delete Advertising and or spam not notable--MONGO 09:29, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Delete as advertising, researched the author and came up with this as the only place that mentions the PFR or the author besides the WP article. KillerChihuahua 15:44, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable. If the PFR had ever been used successfully as a defense in a Canadian criminal case I'd vote differently. As it stands this is just more personal diatribe (with 3 Google hits) than useful information.--Isotope23 18:06, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as nn legal crackpottery, with no wide acceptance of its existence. MCB 06:31, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

"If the PFR had ever been used successfully as a defense in a Canadian criminal case I'd vote differently." Canada's most famous fugitive from the American drug wars Renee Boje is the 11th signatory to the PFR petition. The word diatribe means "A bitter, abusive denunciation." if you had read the PFR you would see that there is nothing bitter or abusive in it.

Wide acceptance should not be a criteria. Over 200 people believe enough in the Primary Fundamental Right to risk the wrath of the police state by signing the PFR petition. Many others endorse its principles privately. {Bernard Palmer|220.239.49.36|12:06, 13 October 2005 (UTC)}}

Please do not confuse "wide acceptance of the principle itself as positive law" with "wide acceptance of the existence of the principle as a well-known, verifiable theory of law". Wikipedia does not, indeed, require the former; but it does require the latter, and there is no evidence of that. MCB 02:27, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

The UN declaration on human rights accepts the principle of mans right to own their own bodies when it states there shall be no slavery anywhere. The Primary Fundamental Right is a title for this embodiment. Bernard Palmer

• Delete. Neologism loosely related to right to privacy. Chick Bowen 19:27, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Since when is neologism a bad thing? Quote Chick Bowen, "Wikipedia is wonderful, but it is scattershot—its function is to present as much information as possible without distinguishing within it. That is its chief strength." (Unsigned comment by User:220.239.49.36. — CB)

Neologism is not a bad thing, but it doesn't belong on Wikipedia, per community consensus and the will of our founder. I certainly didn't mean that statment to defend anything that anyone puts into Wikipedia. On the contrary, my point about the strength of not distinguishing between categories of knowledge is that we can devote 10% of our resources to Pokemon crap and not impact our treatment of Alcaeus. But that doesn't mean we should put forward your original idea as if it were encyclopedic. Chick Bowen 23:47, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

 I have made major changes, there is no advertising. Please review before deleting. Bernard Palmer

Reviewed. It's still your idea and not a pre-existing one. How can an encyclopedia put forward a claim about what Madison would have done were it not for slavery? Anyway, please see Wikipedia:No original research for the policy in question here. Chick Bowen 23:51, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

"The phrase "original research" in this context refers to untested theories; data, statements, concepts and ideas that have not been published in a reputable publication;". I agree the Primary Fundamental Right has not been published in any reputable publication that I know of. The Primary Fundamental Right is very much a child of the Internet, it was born of the Internet, is disseminated by the Internet. No idea so precise and simple could have bloomed anywhere else. Same as Wiki. "the will of [[Jimmy Wales|our founder" was much influenced by Ayne Rand. The Primary Fundamental Right is a bible for 'Objectivists' who advocate laissez-faire capitalism, Jimbo's perfect society. I guarantee if you ask Jimbo to click on the link to 'What is the Primary Fundamental Right' he would recognize the important role the PFR could play in changing society for the better. It is such a simple concept that its real beauty is in its simplicity. Imagine everyone legally owning their own body. It sounds preposterous but none of us in this wonderful technological age actually do. We let it slip away and it is sliding faster and faster. The Mises Institute anticipates totalitarianism will engulf the USA early this century. I think they are right that's why I built the PFR. That's why I am pressing my case with you. I want you to see that just because it hasn't been accepted by the 'elites' it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Bernard Palmer

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.