Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regno d'Italia (888-1024)


 * 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.--Fuhghettaboutit 12:26, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Regno d'Italia (888-1024)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-English text, been on WP:PNT for more than 2 weeks, per PNT, pages older than 2 weeks w/o translation should be sent to AfD. Discussion at PNT indicates that this is already covered in another English-language WP article. Akradecki 20:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete.  The article is about royal coronations, great victories, and a few popes.  I don't think it contains any new information.  Someguy1221 20:48, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Per Someguy's comment. This area is sufficiently represented, so a translation is probably redundant anyway. Adrian   M. H.  21:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete The entire article, partially wikified, is at the Italian Wikipedia. Carlossuarez46 21:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment In that case, CSD A2 applies and it should be speedied, in case a roaming admin sees this. Akradecki 15:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The article on the Italian Wikipedia, it:Regno d'Italia (888-1024), is a cut-and-paste move, and therefore would be speedily deleted as a GFDL violation because it did not preserve the GFDL required changelog and therefore is a copyvio. Its earliest date is May 4, 2007, while the one here has an oldest date of May 2, 2007.Jesse Viviano 15:25, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment So, I'm assuming that this one came first? Is there then a way to transwiki the history from here, so that GFDL is honored? Akradecki 00:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy or not, this should go. The whole GFDL issue is murky when it comes to intra-WP transfers. We have these "requests for translation", when someone actually does that, how is the GFDL complied with based on the (non-English language) original contents? This is a longer discussion that is warranted by the present article, which will likely be deleted regardless of whether speedy criteria apply. For example, just perusing through Translation/%2A/Completed_Translations/April_2007, I took the first article listed: Jean Fourastié, which has an en:WP history that goes back to April 18, 2007. However, it was translated from the fr:Jean Fourastié, which has a history going back to July 13, 2005; this history has not been imported to the English-language article, yet presumably the GFDL would require some credit be given to the French-language authors whose work was translated to create the English-language article. If not, then how do cut and paste jobs differ from wholesale copying and translation jobs? Carlossuarez46 18:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that when a translation is done, the translation should include the time and date of the version of the article being translated and a link to the source article somewhere in the text to credit it will satisfy the GFDL. However, I am not a lawyer and think that I could technically be wrong on this matter. Jesse Viviano 21:21, 21 May 2007 (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.