Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Preamble to the United States Constitution/text


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 12:36, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Preamble to the United States Constitution/text

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Subpages aren't permitted in mainspace. Subpages should not be used "for permanent content that is meant to be part of the encyclopedia." "Templates should not masquerade as article content in the main article namespace; instead, place the text directly into the article." Cyber cobra (talk) 06:32, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: Article already created. --Monterey Bay (talk) 06:33, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikisource if it doesn't exist there already. 65.94.44.124 (talk) 07:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It used to be in the template namespace, at Template:Preamble to the United States Constitution text until someone moved the template to the article namespace. And it was created because of Talk:Preamble to the United States Constitution/Archive 1. Uncle G (talk) 09:02, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * There's further discussion, pointing out that this used to be a template and why, at Talk:Preamble to the United States Constitution/text. Uncle G (talk) 10:24, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  -- Cyber cobra  (talk) 09:10, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  -- Cyber cobra  (talk) 09:10, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Is there a reason not to move it back to Template:Preamble to the United States Constitution text? If not, that's my !vote per Uncle G and Talk:Preamble to the United States Constitution/Archive 1 THF (talk) 09:56, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It would still violate WP:TMP. (See third quotation in nom.) --Cyber cobra (talk) 01:24, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Recreate the template if need be, but there is no reason for the continued existence of this as an article. We have a very intelligent article called Preamble to the United States Constitution that includes the text and gives it the encyclopedic treatment.  Mandsford 14:50, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * &hellip; and whose talk page is as hyperlinked-to above and which transcluded this very template for over a year, for the reasons given on that talk page, until the nominator here a mere day before then nominating this template for deletion. Uncle G (talk) 15:13, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * This isn't correct; the template was moved to mainspace in 2009. It makes sense to remove the transclusion when there's an AFD template on the transcluded text. THF (talk) 18:30, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It is, in fact, correct.  where the transclusion, taken off in the December 2010 edit just hyperlinked-to, was made.  That's one year seven months.  And you'll notice that Cybercobra didn't say anything about AFD when untranscluding the template.  Uncle G (talk) 02:12, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The applicable guideline was cited however. --Cyber cobra (talk) 02:51, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * This page doesn't follow the rules as either an article where it currently resides or as a template where it was originally created. Prior to this implementation the main article had significant vandalism to the text of the Preamble.  Moving the actual text off the main page and into a protected subpage/template eliminated much of the vandalism to the page.  Comparing the two links I provided, 250 edits post creation go back 11 months with some vandalism included but 250 edits prior to it creation went back only 4 months and a lot of it is vandalism and reverts.  So it appears to me that this page is useful in combating vandalism.  I believe the page should be maintained either here or somewhere.  In other words I am saying ignore the rule because it makes the encyclopedia better.   GB  fan  02:53, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Guidelines discourage this sort of hack, which is not worth the added complexity just to selectively semiprotect one part of an article. Just semiprotect all of it if there is too much vandalism.  Sandstein   06:58, 20 December 2010 (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.