Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/WP:LEGAL


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete Hiding  talk 00:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

WP:LEGAL
This is some sort of project or guidline or something (the page is a mess, its hard to tell) about the legal rights or responsibilities of wikipedians. It is written entirely by a brand new user with almost no other edits. On closer inspection, this seems to be treading on rather uncomfortable ground; quoting the lead "WP:LEGAL is a set of unofficial guidelines created by users of Wikipedia to ensure the fair and full application of jurisdictional common law within the Wikipedia website as well as to maintain the application of said law among the "users" of the Wikipedia community." DELETE AND REDIRECT to No legal threats. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - &lt;*&gt; 09:30, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect While systemic bias is a serious problem, how is it a legal issue? It almost sounds like a legal threat against certain Wikipedians.  CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 10:02, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment:Why is there a colon @ the beginning of this page? 68.39.174.238 12:16, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know. It just formatted itself that way.  Bug?  --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - &lt;*&gt; 01:17, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It's because mfd uses : instead of . &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 06:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete and Redirect Appears to be a convoluted violation of WP:POINT. Xoloz 16:25, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Blatant attempt to trick people into thinking that this page is in the Wikipedia namespace. - CorbinSimpson 19:32, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment This is project type, but in the article namespace, I think it's discussion should be here rather then on AfD though, due to the de facto shortcuting method of WP: being employed. xaosflux  Talk  / CVU  20:46, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per all above, failing a deletion vote, it should at the least be moved to wikipedia space, and left as a redirect. xaosflux  Talk  / CVU  20:46, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Scary Legalese. Looking as it does like a part of the Wikipedia namespace, it might seem to a reader that Wikipedia endorses statements like "Whereas current medical information offered on Wikimedia is provided without any legal disclaimer, the website may be jeopardizing the health and safety of users." -- Vary | Talk 02:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Not policy, not guideline, not anything. Ashibaka tock 05:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete this crap. Now we have User:WikiCritic demanding to be paid for editing here.  User:Zoe|(talk) 05:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pure madness.--Sean|Bla ck 05:34, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete; Speedy per common sense vs. No Legal Threats, perhaps? &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 05:41, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per numerous good reasons listed above. Antandrus  (talk) 05:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, speedily if someone feels so moved. Absurd legalese that is by turns inappropriate and factually incorrect. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 05:48, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, trollery. I've replaced the content with a (currently non-functional) redirect to No legal threats for the moment. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 06:08, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, bury in peat etc. --Alf melmac 21:32, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2 Comments: I notice that md1 uses { { FULLPAGENAME } } and I still don't see how that adds a ":" to this page (:WP:LEGAL), and secondly, does anyone else think that "WikiCritic" is related to Mr Treason? His trolling nonsense about "common law on Wikipedia" is strongly suspiscious to me. 68.39.174.238 21:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3rd note: The page has been redirected to the legal threats page now. 68.39.174.238 21:34, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


 * If Mr. Treason is a looney then I guess they could be one and the same. See User talk:WikiCritic Ashibaka tock 22:57, 2 January 2006 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.