I won't have an opinion on that without my attorney reading the text before. NB: I have no attorney.
;-P 2013/6/25 Alan Fletcher <[email protected]> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/International_Conference_on_Condensed_Matter_Nuclear_Science_(2nd_nomination) > > The result was keep. WP:FRINGE does not neccessarily exclude a topic from > inclusion into Wikipedia. However, I do not think fringe applies in the way > we'd all like it to. Despite being a fringe science, Cold Fusion actually > serves a prominent place in popular culture, science fiction, and fringe > science alike. A conference on the subject would not neccessarily fall to > the levels of fringe, then, as would a conference about Hollow Earth. From > a pure WP:GNG standpoint, this AFD has resulted in a huge improvement to > the article which makes me question at least some of the delete !votes > which prempted these improvements. In fact, most of the !votes came before > these improvements. Taking into the fact that the new references were > highly discussed on this AFD before being introduced to the article, > though, means that I cannot discount those votes on their timing alone. > Several folks have said that WP:GNG is not met if the sources are not about > the conference. I quote GNG "Significant coverage is more than a trivial > mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material." The only > other argument to delete, then, is that the coverage is not significant > enough to write a decent article but the current version of the article > defeats that argument as well. Thusly, I see a discussion that has stronger > arguments towards keep. If it were a !vote count, this may be a no > consensus. But as an examination of the argument, we have a keep result. > v/r - TP 7:06 pm, Yesterday (UTC-7) > > [ By an administrator ] > >
