Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BSD and GPL licensing

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 of the debate was keep but encourage cleanup. Ifnord 18:45, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BSD and GPL licensing[edit]

Delete. The article is an original research essay comparing the two licenses. There are already adequate articles on the licenses themselves. Superm401 - Talk 23:34, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Wikipedia is not for original research. Both the BSD and GPL pages already have sufficient and encyclopedic information regarding intercompatibility. --Kinu 23:42, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. If there's something wrong with the article, that isn't grounds for deletion, it's grounds for repair and work. This article can exist in a sourced and referenced way; there is undoubtedly lots of material Out There that can be sourced for such an article. Dysprosia 23:51, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I would usually say to delete this kind of languishing stuff, but I feel like being optimistic about this one and believing the present signs of life are going to lead to improvement, or at least a decision. If it doesn't change in some way (rewritten, decision the topic is better discussed elsewhere) within the next couple of weeks then I'll say delete it, but not right now. NicM 00:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Keep: If Wikipedia has room for articles comparing fighter jets, it has room for articles comparing open source licences. --AlexWCovington (talk) 03:03, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. as above -- Marvin147 05:06, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, essay. WP is not replacement for GNU FAQ. Comparison of aircrafts can be based on exact parameters, this is just someone's school work. Pavel Vozenilek 05:44, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It is entirely possible to compare two things in a NPOV manner. The talk page indicates a recognition of the POV problems and active work on resolving it. Turnstep 20:01, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but cleanup. GPL & BSD license are two of the most popularly debated licenses. The topic is notable, but the article needs to be made NPOV, wfyed, citations added, etc. --Karnesky 20:06, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The way it reads, I think it should be scrapped and started a new, I dislike it's vibe. 65.94.58.104 03:02, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think a comparison of open source licenses is worthwhile, but this is terribly written and there's no reason to limit such a comparison to just two licenses (even two of the most popular). --Craig Stuntz 15:45, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, possibly rename and expand to compare with other licenses. Kappa 03:56, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Straight to the point without endless implications. Maybe just a little bit shorter. --212.98.173.72 10:31, 7 February 2006 (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.