Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Chronicles of Legalization


 * 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. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

The Chronicles of Legalization

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article concerns unremarkable student essay on legalization of marijuana; violates WP:NOTESSAY—does anyone know if this can be speedied?  Ignatz mice•talk 04:57, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Reading the "Addendum of Hope" section, I'm wondering if this might be a well-presented hoax. Thoughts?  Ignatz mice•talk 05:00, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Thank you for the comment. I have removed the attempted humorous element from the summary of the Addendum.  Let me clarify that the Wikipedia article for The Chronicles of Legalization is NOT The Chronicles of Legalization itself.  I wrote the Wikipedia article as an objective observation of the themes and implications contained within the essays themselves.  Regardless of whether or not the Wikipedia article will be deleted at this point of time is a moot point: the publication exists, and has already been shared both with the subcommittee in Congress that proposed H.R.499 and to a small portion of the American public. talk 11:50, 15 April 2013 (PST)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:39, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete as promotional (WP:G11) WP:GNG failure. There are very few standalone Wikipedia articles on scientific articles, because few such papers actually meet notability standards on their own. That this paper has been reviewed by a congressional subcommittee indicates some importance, but nowhere near the level needed for a standalone article. I also think this could just be a hoax. "The author intends to publish each of the Five Chronicles on Wikipedia by the end of April, 2013" basically admits to the promotional intent, indicating that the author thinks Wikipedia publishes original thought. --BDD (talk) 18:28, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have edited the thumbnail text to read, "The author intends to publish each of the Five Chronicles by the end of April 2013." I will not go so far as to say that the publication has been reviewed by a congressional subcommittee at this point in time. But the paper HAS been sent to a legislative assistant that works in the office of the congressman who proposed H.R.499. So, at the very least, it is safe to assume that the publication will eventually play some role in the debates over marijuana prohibition. THE CHRONICLES OF LEGALIZATION IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE: it is a scientific argument that draws upon scientific references, among other types. THE CHRONICLES OF LEGALIZATION IS NOT A HOAX: whether or not the author exists (which he does, for the record) is irrelevant: these arguments now exist. talk 1:15pm, 16 April 2013 (PST)
 * Please see WP:CRYSTAL and WP:MADEUP. --BDD (talk) 20:36, 16 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment: The author has indirectly and respectfully invited President Barack Obama to visit the Wikipedia page and to read The Chronicles. The author will be uploading the remaining essays of The Chronicles momentarily. talk 4:40pm, 16 April 2013 (PST)
 * Delete. Unsourced essay. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:24, 17 April 2013 (UTC).
 * Comment: There are two sources thus far. The remaining sources can be found within the image for each Chronicle. On 22 April 2013, all sources will be included in the Wikipedia article. talk 12:45am, 17 April 2013 (PST)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.93.101.31 (talk) — 71.93.101.31 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete - There is no coverage about this collection of essays to establish it as notable. -- Whpq (talk) 18:18, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: The collection of essays was written less than three weeks ago. Expectations of coverage for the article are simply those: expectations. The author of The Chronicles considers any additional comments by Wikipedia reviewers to delete the article as attempted infringements of his First Amendment rights as an American citizen, at least until 22 April 2013. The author is exercising his right of freedom of speech, petitioning the federal government of the United States for a redress of grievances. talk 12:25pm, 17 April 2013 (PST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.93.101.31 (talk)
 * Reply - You have a fundamental misunderstanding the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Wikipedia is not the United States Government.  You are welcome to publish your screed elsewhere, but Wikipedia is not a soapbox. -- Whpq (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: The Chronicles of Legalization has been published. The paper is available here: http://issuu.com/omsies/docs/chroniclesoflegalization. Please elaborate on the "fundamental misunderstanding" of the First Amendment. talk 3:00pm, 17 April 2013 (PST)
 * Reply - that's off-topic for this discussion so I have answered on your talk page. -- Whpq (talk) 22:14, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Thank you for the clarification. talk 3:20pm, 17 April 2013 (PST)
 * Delete; no-brainer, WP:SOAP. TJRC (talk) 00:10, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: This was already addressed. talk 5:20pm, 19 April 2013 (PST)
 * No, and I don't believe it can be. This article is about a non-notable essay, and exists merely to promote it.  TJRC (talk) 00:40, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: The fact that you call the essay 'non-notable,' and that you are trying to have the article deleted, is a testament to its notability. talk 7:38pm, 19 April 2013 (PST)
 * 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.