Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Disability rights in Prince Edward Island

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. - Mailer Diablo 04:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disability rights in Prince Edward Island[edit]

Article consists of totally original research. Author was blocked for showing "ownership" of article and trying to revoke GFDL license to text contributed to Wikipedia see for instance User_talk:Sdpate#Copyright. While I'd normally be adverse to follow the wishes of someone who tried to revoke his license of text to us, this article is too much of an original work to stand on the encyclopedia. Also, there's no evidence that disability rights on Prince Edward Island are any different than the rest of Canada Nardman1 19:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the deletion of this page. It seems to have been used as an attempt to sway voters to take a position during an upcoming election on Prince Edward Island. While I have no problem having a page on disability rights on Prince Edward Island - this page was extremely problematic because it was thoroughly a "one issue" page and had no real purpose, in my opinion, other than to lead people to believe that a government had done bad things to disabled people on PEI. While this is not true - an effort to make it factual and fair would be far too much work for very little benefit. Faircomment 19:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, you're saying delete? -- Zanimum 20:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral; legitimate topic, bad guidance so far. However, if we can get some other people to edit, the history of d. rights in PEI since 1873 could be a great article. -- Zanimum 20:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral; The article has some promise as a general history article. Also, why does it have to be about PEI? What I am thinking is that the article can either become more of a article on history disability rights in Canada in general, and have sub sections pertaining to each province, or a history of disability rights in PEI. -- 20:25, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, each province moves at it's own pace, features its own cast of characters, etc. We could move it and skin it too a shorter length, but there's a distinct story in each province, that would be lost by just focusing in on the national picture. -- Zanimum 00:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because (a) it's original research from someone who is pursuing a political agenda and (b) there is no evidence that disability rights in PEI are any different to the rest of Canada. It is asserted by the author of this article that Zamium has a conflict of interest. Guy (Help!) 21:33, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The COI bit is complete bull. The only reason I've edited this article and Pat Binns was too clean it up before a media report. Aside from the CBC-TV reporter I talked to on the phone, and CBC Radio person I talked to via email, I do solemnly swear that I have not knowing talked to someone whose permanent residence is on Prince Edward Island, since I vacationed there in 1995 as a child. I'm not saying I haven't unwittingly talked to a PEIer, or talked to former PEIers, but I haven't knowingly talked to a then current resident. On my Facebook, of which I believe my profile is public to anyone, I have claimed liberal political views since I joined. My favourite prime minister, full disclosure, is Conservative Sir Charles Tupper, but solely because of his great, great sideburns. That, and the fact he's the only Canadian PM to have town named after him, so far as I know.

Of greater importance, I even warned the anon IP belonging to a member of the PC Youth (User talk:74.210.4.228), to let them know their most recent edits were still out of line. -- Zanimum 00:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SPEEDY DELETE Just get rid of the problem already. It's not important enough to care about some legal wanker threats. SchmuckyTheCat 23:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I live on PEI and I think I would have to agree with SchmuckyTheCat. A computer literate guy with an agenda tried to take over wikipedia to promote a cause. I don't know this guy - but I know what the general opinion of him is here. Faircomment 23:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Propaganda stuff. --Attilios 09:07, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete whatever the vandal Sdpate wrote and start over. JuJube 10:03, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please merge any pertinent information into Disability rights movement. Currently, that article is US-centric tagged, so some info (however small) from Canada would be useful. The rest can be done away with. Mahalo. --Ali'i 20:52, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Ali'i's suggestion. Leave an NPOV tag on the merged section if appropriate, but I'd hate to see someone's baseless legal posturing validated by a hasty deletion. Dppowell 22:27, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not worth the trouble. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Guy. Metamagician3000 23:30, 29 April 2007 (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.