The result was keep. Per ANI can we have a single discussion somewhere? Spartaz Humbug! 04:44, 27 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete Not encyclopedic at all. Not a notable topic, at all. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, which is exactly what this article is. Basket of Puppies 02:35, 26 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete Wikipedia is not a dumping ground for random information and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia while this article is not at all encyclopedic. Basket of Puppies 13:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. Articles on well-documented government policies that affect many people should have no problem passing WP:NOTABILITY, and the encyclopaedia certainly does not suffer from the presence of additional, nonspammy, accurate, sourced information of international interest.
- A few hours ago Basket of Puppies went on a deletion spree suggesting that many of these articles were factually inaccurate. Since it was pointed out that many of the articles are directly based on reliable sources, Basket of Puppies has rephrased their reason for deletion, and pasted that across many articles instead, despite a number of objections in various locations. I think it would have been appropriate for Basket of Puppies to seek consensus, or address concerns, before going on another deletion spree.
- bobrayner ( talk) 13:42, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
The result was keep. Per ANI can we have a single discussion somewhere? Spartaz Humbug! 04:44, 27 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete Not encyclopedic at all. Not a notable topic, at all. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, which is exactly what this article is. Basket of Puppies 02:35, 26 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Delete Wikipedia is not a dumping ground for random information and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia while this article is not at all encyclopedic. Basket of Puppies 13:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. Articles on well-documented government policies that affect many people should have no problem passing WP:NOTABILITY, and the encyclopaedia certainly does not suffer from the presence of additional, nonspammy, accurate, sourced information of international interest.
- A few hours ago Basket of Puppies went on a deletion spree suggesting that many of these articles were factually inaccurate. Since it was pointed out that many of the articles are directly based on reliable sources, Basket of Puppies has rephrased their reason for deletion, and pasted that across many articles instead, despite a number of objections in various locations. I think it would have been appropriate for Basket of Puppies to seek consensus, or address concerns, before going on another deletion spree.
- bobrayner ( talk) 13:42, 26 August 2010 (UTC)