Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virtual First Amendment

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 delete. --Ezeu 00:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Virtual First Amendment

Paean to non-notable theory of NN book by NN author. -- FRCP11 23:50, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom--Nick Y. 00:38, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete per nom. There are a great number of problems with that article, and most of them couldn't be solved by any amount of clean up. -- Kicking222 01:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment only 184 google hits, some of which are unrelated or to this article/mirrors. Abstain. - Jersyko·talk 01:22, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. The book and theory aren't central to First Amendment jurisprudence, but it's a serious opinion that we can reasonably catalog. Besides, having the separate article will make it easier to stop the incessant efforts to insert heavily POV material into the First Amendment article. JamesMLane t c 18:07, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment. Are we to say that the way to override notability problems with an article is to incessantly try to violate Wikipedia standards in related legitimate articles? Seems to create some perverse incentives. Wikipedia doesn't do enough to punish bad actors, and it seems strange to reward them instead. -- FRCP11 18:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. (Not a violation of the First Amendment, as Wikipedia is not a government agency....) 20:35, 25 May 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.