Talk:Benevolent Dictator For Life
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is part of WikiProject Free Software, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve free software-related articles. | |
| Stub | rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale |
| Low | rated as low-importance on the assessment scale |
[edit] Contesting Deletion
"Benevolent Dictator For Life" is a well known term in the OSS development world. There is no reference for it inside Wikipedia, and the proposed article, even if short, sounds like a good startup for it.
Also, the proposed text has been taken from the Spanish version of the same page, so other languages should be checked in that case.
- It was deleted via AfD a while ago, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benevolent Dictator for Life (2nd nomination). I got the old version userfied to my user space, see User:FrankTobia/Benevolent Dictator for Life for the old version and what was wrong with it. I recommend improving the issues brought up in AfD to avoid such happenings in the future. I'll be around to help. -FrankTobia (talk) 15:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- Agreed it should stay, and it appears the main reason it was deleted (being Guido centric) has been resolved. Now, the question is, how much content from the former "Benevolent Dictator" article should be placed here? In other words, how much does the FL part of BDFL affect this article? Or will the aforementioned article come back to life too? It's unfortunate how these BD articles keep getting deleted... apparently by people unaware of the Open Source world. Philipolson (talk) 01:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The article became senseless
PhilKnight has been able to destroy the article, maybe for fun, indicating a reference to a Guido interview where he cited BDFL and the humorous way people called him in that way. That could have marked the beginning of the usage of this term, but today it has a completely different and well known meaning in the OSS world.
The original article pointed the meaning of the term, not facts that need to be cited, so there is no reason to simply delete it without any justification. I'm reverting the relevant part of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FredCK (talk • contribs) 13:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
