Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Freelancing on the Internet

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. Chetblong^{T C} 01:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Freelancing on the Internet[edit]

This article is original research, a violation of WP:NOT#OR. Orange Mike | Talk 16:58, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as WP:OR. Cirt (talk) 17:07, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not one single citation and User:Watcher, who created the article, has not logged in since 2004. Rob (talk) 17:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, OR, WP is not a blog Travellingcari (talk) 17:15, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as original research. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - agree that this constitutes original research. -- Roleplayer (talk) 19:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete definate WP:OR --Pmedema (talk) 19:09, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:OR. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 19:54, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The topic as actually valid enough but this isn't the article we should have on this. EconomicsGuy (talk) 20:16, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It's OR at the moment but it might be able to be improved if people find cites and generally make it compliant with WP:V and WP:NOR, in which case I would be inclined towards a keep. No vote here.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 15:18, 23 February 2008 (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.