Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/English Wikipedia

 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 KEEP. Jinian 00:02, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

English Wikipedia
Vanity, self-reference. If this is all we have to say about the English Wikipedia, it isn't worth having. This article has been here a long time, nobody's done any better than this? RickK 05:49, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Beat me to it! Delete, too self referential, any content is an easy merge with the main Wikipedia article. Slac speak up!
 * Keep. The article is pathetic. But since Wikipedia is not the same as English Wikipedia, we need this article. -- Taku 06:48, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Vanity. But redirects are cheap, and might discourage someone else with the same Bright Idea. &mdash;Korath (Talk) 07:08, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * When I saw this nomination, my heart leaped into my throat--I thought it was that time of year again. We've still got a few days, though. Anyway, redirect this article to Wikipedia. Meelar (talk) 07:10, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Wikipedia. Megan1967 08:10, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect. 'Nuff said. Alphax &tau;&epsilon;&chi; 09:43, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect, and list German Wikipedia and Japanese Wikipedia for a proposed merge. JFW | T@lk  14:10, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment how about moving this stuff to the Wikipedia namespace? 132.205.15.43 14:53, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. All articles under category:Wikipedias by language should be kept. &mdash; Instantnood 15:37, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment I changed to  as per VFD footer guidelines. No vote yet, but thinking about voting for delete/redirect unless improved but keeping other non-stubs in Category:Wikipedias by language. I would oppose merge of German and Japanese as they are larger and Wikipedia is at 31Kb now. -Wikibob | Talk 16:58, 2005 Mar 28 (UTC)
 * Comment it looks like all the language Wikipedias would fit nicely in History of Wikipedia, the Chinese one is almost identically copied from there in any case. I would then favour a redirect of this English one to History of Wikipedia. Likewise all the others. They can grow from section stubs there and as/if one gets big enough it becomes an article. The reader could then see all the (major) language Wikipedia in one article and compare and contrast their histories. However I don't think future potential is an argument, still thinking, though, not a vote. -Wikibob | Talk 20:04, 2005 Mar 31 (UTC)
 * Keep, unless all the other articles about the different Wikipedia editions get deleted or redirected as well. --Conti|&#9993; 18:09, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * You mean articles like Japanese Wikipedia and Chinese Wikipedia? Those are fairly lengthy! -- Taku
 * That's my point, such articles have the potential to become big, so why should we delete them? --Conti|&#9993; 18:33, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and allow for organic growth. --GRider\talk 18:47, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect --Henrygb 20:45, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep to counteract systemic bias caused by wikimodesty. Kappa 22:16, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * The COTW discussion for this article should make interesting reading. Uncle G 22:50, 2005 Mar 28 (UTC)
 * Move to the Wikipedia namespace. Too self-referential for a main namespace article.  And yes, all the similar articles should go to the same place.  Japanese Wikipedia and Chinese Wikipedia are also too self-referential.  If this were a different topic, we would probably consider it original research.  Rossami (talk) 01:04, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable encyclopedia in English. Capitalistroadster 10:50, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Wikipedia. I understand the reasoning of all those who voted keep, but not their conclusion. Everything which is in this article is already at the Wikipedia article, and so I think a redirect is in order. Sjakkalle 14:12, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Wikipedia. There is nothing here which can't (and shouldn't) be covered elsewhere. If it is kept there will need to be a page on each Wikipedia in every language to avoid bias - that would be something like 25000 pointless articles... --bainer 08:32, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Uhm, have a look at Category:Wikipedias by language. We already have some articles on the different wikipedias, and some of them are not substubs but useful articles. --Conti|&#9993;
 * Keep  S &gamma; &omega; &Omega; &eta; &Sigma;  t&alpha;lk 18:36, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, expand. Useless as it stands, but a perfectly valid topic. Plenty could be done on this. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:34, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, expand it. Look at the Japanese and Chinese Wikipedia articles.  This article has potential.  Something as important and impressive as English Wikipedia (as well as all other versions of Wikipedia) deserves an article.  And additionally, what is wrong with self-reference?  All articles should talk about their subject matter.  If no one will write the article, at very least it should redirect to History of Wikipedia.  In any case, it should be changed from its current state.


 * 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.