Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Copyleft patent
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 05:11, 6 February 2023 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.Revision as of 05:11, 6 February 2023 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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. Sandstein 16:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Copyleft patent (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Given that i quite liked the idea, i actually went through almost a hundred pages of apparent information on this topic, however, except for the mirrors of this very article, a brief mention on a Slashdot comment [1], which i am pretty sure only accidently brought the term patent inbetween the better known term "copyleft license", there is no notable or reliable mention of this anywhere that i can think to look. Jimmi Hugh (talk) 16:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I just Googled the term and couldn't find anything that satisfies WP:N. I'll change my mind if anyone posts such sources. --Explodicle (T/C) 16:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - same problem with Google. No evidence that concept is becoming more popular -- if it did anywhere, it would be online to find.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - per above. I, too, think it's a good idea, but you can't use wikipedia to create notability (which is what I'm surmising). I'd change my mind in a heartbeat should somebody uncover some hidden trove of off-line, printed sources buttressing notability. -- Quartermaster (talk) 18:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete or Redirect This is covered in the more general copyleft article, and does not need its own. At best this merits a paragraph in the general copyleft article. HatlessAtless (talk) 20:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.