Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Technologies of political control


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:16, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Technologies of political control

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

I stumbled upon this page and cleaned it up a bit, but I don't see any point to its existence nothing links to it and the original author has abondoned it as far as I can tell. Unless some conspiricy/anarchist/activist wants to take it over and make it beutiful Jmackaerospace (talk) 23:22, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * While it might appear to be just an accidental sequence of words in a report title, it is in fact a subject of ongoing discourse. WillOakland (talk) 00:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Mention in an official report to the EU (if substantiated) imply that it is notable enough to warrant governmental attention, and therefore notable enough for Wikipedia. 69.210.42.241 (talk) 00:48, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep It: This article, though vague in it's current state, addresses an important socio-political issue and deserves attention within the Wikipedia project. I concur, that a topic that receives official mention in a governmental report, especially one with such deep implications for the future of our democratic and republican forms of government MUST be addressed in as much detail as possible. The article needs to be cleaned up. There is no justification for deletion nor does there exist a preponderance of supported arguments for deletion, which carry the burden, to justify such an action. --A. Poinçot (talk) 08:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't see any point to this nomination - just another case of WP:NOEFFORT. The topic seems quite notable and Wikipedia has no deadline.  Colonel Warden (talk) 18:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete  Just an outline, and ignored since 2004 except for bot-like edits. Although there is no deadline for improvement, this article is moribund. It needs more than clean-up, it needs to be written.  If someone wants to write an article, let them start over. DGG (talk) 21:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not so sure about the notability, After all, it is a phrase that can be used of virutaly anything you care to point it at, so it is not surprising that it's been used a lot. Furthermore with that in mind, I see this as a set of things that can be too narrow or too large depending on what you define as a 'technology of polotical control'. Therefore a NPOV will be hard to achive.Jmackaerospace (talk) 13:08, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep someone has now posted a link to the EU paper, and while the whole thing is still paranoid ramblings there is enough data there to turn it into a proper article. It still need cleaning up, but is no loger bad enough to warant deletion.Jmackaerospace (talk) 13:33, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per DGG.Nrswanson (talk) 10:07, 21 March 2009 (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.