Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armenian Genocide/Working version

 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 - kept - SimonP 01:10, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

Armenian Genocide/Working version
Originally created for dispute resolution, now inactive --DanielNuyu 00:43, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * If its just a duplicate article list for speedy deletion--nixie 03:13, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * extremely strong and obnoxious keep. It is not a duplicate article. It is a temp working version. Reasonable time since last edit did not expire yet. If you don't like it sitting here, talk to the authors first. Mikkalai 04:52, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * keep looks ok to me (as long as the 'working version' changes!) CoolGuy 06:32, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. Not a duplicate, but a working version. Armenian Genocide is suffering from a serious content dispute. Having this article around can help editors reach an agreement without constantly reverting the main article. Mgm|(talk) 08:39, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. POV fork.  Move it to User space until completed.  RickK 19:54, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep for then history. Speedy it when the originator says it's okay (per deletion policy). Raise this again if someone links to it from elsewhere in article space. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 21:24, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, agree with MGM. If it helps resolve disputes I see nothing wrong in keeping it. Megan1967 01:24, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Huh? How is keeping POV versions of an article helping to resolve disputes?  RickK 07:09, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * The function of this article is to reach agreement on the content of the main genocide article without having to revert or edit the existing information. There is nothing wrong with doing that. Megan1967 08:24, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I am strongly opposed to working on temp articles in the article space, but I guess I'm outnumbered. This really should be in some User space or else the original article should be deleted and this one put in its place.  RickK 20:45, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, failing that move to another namespace. Kappa 10:54, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, working version serves purpose 141.211.138.85 06:01, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete, it's basically the same article. 199.164.68.191 14:54, 3 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.