Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Computer Networks: The Heralds of Resource Sharing


 * 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 was keep. John254 00:40, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Computer Networks: The Heralds of Resource Sharing

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I can't find any reliable sources for this. Schuym1 (talk) 05:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * comment There is a book which mentions this film. Don't automatically discount the subject non-notable because of missing sources. The age of the film probably makes it harder to find material. This appears to be have been produced by MIT. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Riffic (talk • contribs) 05:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * keep just because it is hard to verify does not mean it is not verified. all i had to do was take the subtitle and it turned up more than than enough hits and substantive sources to justify notability.   it is notable film in any case given who is in it and what they say. --Buridan (talk) 13:17, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I never said it wasn't verified. All I said was that I couldn't find any reliable sources. Articles have to have multiple reliable sources. Can you please add the sources, that you found, to the article? Schuym1 (talk) 14:58, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * notability is established based on the participants in the film. the film is widely distributed, you can watch it on the web for free.   this is a case of... if you want sources, it is your job, else 'ignore all rules'.  wanting it 'improved' is not a reason for deletion.  what i did was say, does the film exist?  answer yes.   is it notable, answer yes, why is it notable, answer because the participants in the film are notable. --Buridan (talk) 16:44, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess you're right about the notable part. If a documentary gets uploaded, it is most likely a copyright violation. Schuym1 (talk) 17:09, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, I did not nominate the article because I wanted it improved. There are lots of AFDs that are started because the nominator couldn't find reliable sources. Schuym1 (talk) 17:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * for what reason would one need reliable sources? either you dispute the validity of the article, or you want to improve it. also, note that if a documentary is produced by the government of the u.s., unless some special provision is made by congress, that documentary is in public domain, no copyright. --Buridan (talk) 18:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * To show it's notability which that doesn't apply to this because the article shows it's notability. I made a mistake. Please stop continuing this. Schuym1 (talk) 19:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Buridan: Dunno why you're jumping all over the kid. The article has no sources and he said he can't find any. A very good reason for deletion. Verifiability is "the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia." -- brew  crewer  (yada, yada) 23:54, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Brewcrewer, its not that there are no sources for this article; there are no sources online. I believe that there might be someone at MIT who can shed more light on this production, or their library could have more information. This involves someone doing the footwork and visiting some dead trees, of course. riffic (talk) 00:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Of course, but that's not related to my point. I just though that he was being to critical of the nominator who gave a very valid reason for deletion. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 00:57, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * he actually didnt' give a solid reason for deletion. he said he can't find sources.   if you can't find sources, you mark the article for improvement.  you don't delete it.  You would nominate it for deletion if for instance it wasn't notable, or for instance if it was entirely fictive. but the kid had the video which is full of notable people.  for instance, in my personal library i cannot find anything to cite this with either, should i nominate it for deletion?  no, i would just mark it that the article needs sources. find something good to delete.--Buridan (talk) 02:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't have the video. Schuym1 (talk) 03:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm done watching this. Do not expect a reply from me. Schuym1 (talk) 07:27, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * keep Nomination lacks a solid reason to delete. riffic (talk) 15:59, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Withdraw: I would like to withdraw this nomination. Schuym1 (talk) 18:46, 13 August 2008 (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.