Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Examined Life (Robert Nozick book)


 * 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 as a copy of The Examined Life. While this was created in January, the thing is that we already have an article for this specific book. I'm closing this early because we don't need two identical copies of the same article. There might be some issues with notability, but the main point of this sees to be to get rid of the extra copy. I don't really see where this needs to go through a second week at AfD. For the one trying to make a disambiguation page, that's the sort of thing you should first discuss on the article's talk page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:12, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

The Examined Life (Robert Nozick book)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is a duplicate of another article: The Examined Life. The creator turned the original article into a disambiguation page (which I have reverted), and then created this duplicate page as a replacement. I'm nominating it for deletion, because changes of this nature aren't allowed. It is the equivalent of doing a cut-and-paste move, and it's unacceptable for the same reasons, since it displaces the revision history of the page. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 00:51, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 16 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Proposal defines situation accurately. I think this may have been some kind of attempt at a content fork, regarding disagreements over Nozick's ideas (and when it was forked, the original article was slightly NPOV regarding Nozick's inheritance tax reforms, but that has been corrected). This is an unnecessary duplicate. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:35, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 01:30, 24 March 2014 (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.