Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/October Open Game License

October Open Game License was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. 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 DELETE

This entry describes an open source license which wasn't used and no longer exists, and at this point the Wikipedia entry is nothing more than a link to the Creative Commons license. The only purpose for keeping this entry active would be to argue over it (POV-heavy edits have already been added and deleted a couple of times), which the authors of the subject of the entry (of whom I am one) deem to be a colossal waste of time. I think Wikipedia would be improved by just removing the article. Bblackmoor 02:06, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

For the record, the "al fresco" game (which is, as far as I know, the first and only third-party game ever released under the OOGL) has long since been released under a Creative Commons license. The authors of that game specifically request people not to use the OOGL. The argument for keeping this entry active amounts to little more than making it into a subject of controversy (and it's a couple of years too late for that). -- Bblackmoor 18:20, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mrwojo 14:38, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Wasn't used, so no point in preserving it for history, and not active, so no point in preserving it for contemporary information. Geogre 15:30, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep: it is misleading to assume that this license is inactive, in fact there are still systems and sites out their who have and are still publishing their material under the OOGL, for example the al'Fresco RPG and the Jazz RPG. Also, this should be kept for historical reasons as one of the first alternatives to the OGL. Please note that Bblackmoor is the author of this license and may have other reasons than those stated for deleting this page. --Axon 14:17, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Non-notable, POV, Fancruft (members of the "open source" community can be just as vocal and subjective as any Star Trek or Buffy fan).
 * Keep Notable topic.  --L33tminion | (talk) 16:21, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. One use of the license hardly makes it notable. Wile E. Heresiarch 23:20, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Will it be noted here when a determination has been made? -- Bblackmoor 03:00, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.