Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matter of fact


 * 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:51, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Matter of fact

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Context of this article is unverifiable OR while the cited source supports the dictionary definition of the term, not the philosophical context of it. Atsme 📞📧 00:19, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:03, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:03, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete We have a WIkipedisIsNot policy, but I cannot remember it's name. Its a pretty uncommon word, which is why I remember it exists.L3X1 (distænt write)   )evidence(  01:43, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Its not in a past AfD I thought it be at, and I cannot find another AfD where it was used. If anyone knows it please ping me and enlighten me. L3X1 (distænt write)   )evidence(  01:53, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTNEO was what I was thinking of. L3X1 (distænt write)   )evidence(  13:32, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:02, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:07, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Logic-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:07, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * delete as apparent OR. Mangoe (talk) 18:47, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep It is a plain matter of fact that the content is verifiable. For example, see The Cambridge Companion to Hume. Andrew D. (talk) 23:03, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947(c) (m) 04:32, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete, a mixture of dicdef and apparent OR.  Sandstein   14:08, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - no info on the cultural significance or history of the term - just its usage. I think WP:NEO applies also., per L3X1's comment above. TimTempleton (talk)  (cont)  19:29, 30 August 2017 (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.