Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Extradition, the Right of Asylum, and Julian Assange


 * 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 delete. Davewild (talk) 20:56, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Extradition, the Right of Asylum, and Julian Assange

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not qualify as a standalone article per WP:NOTESSAY, WP:NOR and WP:SYNTHESIS. There may be a possibility of some of the content in the article's "Julian Assange as a case study" section being selectively merged to Julian Assange, but not in its present form as a "case study." North America1000 14:19, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:22, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:22, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:23, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ecuador-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:23, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:23, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:25, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as nomination: great essay title but not a suitable title for an encyclopedia article. Any useful content can be merged.TheLongTone (talk) 14:24, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete No brainer per nom. It's an originally researched essay. Philg88 ♦talk 15:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, there really isn't any valid content here to merge, but if anyone can find bits that would be useful, I would agree with that. Winner 42 Talk to me!  17:43, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete At first I thought this was a title of a book, in which case there might be some notability, depending. However as it stands it is not encyclopedia, and has no place in Wikipedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:38, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:OR--Antigng (talk) 12:00, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's an essay.  Some of the listed sources could probably be used in other articles, but I'm not convinced there's anything to merge anywhere.  This would make a fine blog post or whatever, but it's not an encyclopedia article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:17, 4 June 2015 (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.