Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Massively Collaborative Self Governance


 * 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. Remarkably frank author deletion request here. - RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 11:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Massively Collaborative Self Governance

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

Proposal for a new form of government. Article by user:Kevinstonge who has for some reason removed the fact that the theory was first proposed by Kevin St.Onge in January, 2008. Pure original research. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 21:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - self-confessed original research, and Wikipedia is not a soapbox for propounding new theories. JohnCD (talk) 21:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - ideology/abstraction/concept that is likely extrapolated from the references - meets WP:NOR.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 22:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.   --  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined  /  C ) 22:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per all above. OlenWhitaker (talk) 22:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete; Snowball Clause Due to self-confessed original research, this article doesn't even have a snowball's chance in hell of getting an unexpected stay from Deletion, so there is no need to continue to run it through the deletion process as of WP:SNOWBALL --MahaPanta (talk) 22:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete This, to me, appears to be someone thinking up a form of government based on the way Wikipedia is run, and unexpectedly finding an "example" in the real world. Also, the weather forecast for this AFD seems to be heavy snow... J.d ela noy gabs adds 23:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Normally "Also, the weather forecast for this AFD seems to be heavy snow" would be WP:CRYSTAL, but in this case, you make a valid, yet funny reason this article should already be deleted. --MahaPanta (talk) 23:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * My apologies - you all are correct, this is not encyclopedic knowledge--it is original research and suffers from significant lack of notability. Kevinstonge (talk) 09:47, 10 March 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.