Talk:Foundation for Rational Economics and Education
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Comments
[edit] For the record
On February 3, 2008 I bagan an article entitled Foundation for Rational Economics and Education as a stub, and began collecting links and refining the article. After a few minutes, I received a message, which I read. The message said the following:
- "A tag has been placed on Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information."
- "If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding
{{hangon}}to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Dougie WII (talk) 12:41, 3 February 2008 (UTC) "
So I proceded to place the required tag at the top of the page. However, the page was already gone. I'd say that deleting an article before it is started is a highly questionable practice. Please revise this practice and advise me once the problem is fixed. JLMadrigal (talk) 13:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Then I received the following message:
- "Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia
- If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding
{{hangon}}to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. nancy (talk) 13:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
...and I returned to the article page which had the following message:
db-meta|It is a test page (CSD G2).| |notes= Above template detranscluded by User:Jerry
But the article was gone. So I began to restore the article, by bringing it up from "history".
But it was not in history either.
Please restore this article so that I may procede with my edits, and bring it up to Wikipedia standards. JLMadrigal (talk) 13:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- Restored. If you don't fix it up quickly, it will probably be deleted again. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Merge proposal
[edit] Merge with Ron Paul
FREE seems to be almost exclusively a project of Ron Paul, and I can't find any press coverage of the organization independent of Paul. I propose that the information on this page be moved to the appropriate place on the Ron Paul page. Binarybits (talk) 05:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- To Binarybits and DougieWII: FREE has an independent role in having published some of the allegedly controversial newsletters, as well as in its other projects. There was some more previous content here that has been speedy-deleted and which I have requested moved to the history of this page at WP:DRV. Can we hold off on sudden decisions until after we review that please, and incorporate what can be reliably sourced? Thanks! John J. Bulten (talk) 19:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- At present it looks a straightforward merge but we'll see what the history merge brings. BlueValour (talk) 22:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- All I can say is it certainly seems far more logical to merge than to delete this. AltiusBimm (talk) 11:19, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

