Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matrix scheme: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 05:09, 6 April 2007

Latest revision as of 21:01, 7 February 2023

(12 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)

Line 1:

<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">

:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''

<!--Template:Afd top

Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''keep'''. If editorial disputes continue, the proper method of resolution can be found under [[WP:DISPUTE]]. [[User:Arkyan|<b><span style="color:#0000FF;">Ar</span><span style="color:#3535CF;">ky</span><span style="color:#6060BF;">an</span></b>]] &#149; [[User_talk:Arkyan|^(talk)]] 20:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

===[[Matrix scheme]]===

{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|W}}

:{{la|Matrix scheme}} – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matrix scheme|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 April 6#{{anchorencode:Matrix scheme}}|View log]])</noinclude>

This article has become an edit war. Well to say it's become an edit war would be to insinuate that it hasn't been one for well over a year. The article has *never* achieved any degree of neutrality, and at least one site (matrixwatch.org) actively tries to use the article to increase their exposure and thusly draw traffic to their site. The thing is so full of rhetoric and half-truths and accusations from both sides of the argument that it's just become untenable. [[User:Samoyed|Samoyed]] 04:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

*'''Strong Keep''' - Notable marketing scheme being investigated by regulators in both UK and USA. Cited. Needs arbitration, but the topic is notable. Obvious edit war. [[User:Yakuman|Yakuman (数え役満)]] 05:03, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

*'''Strong Delete''' - This is the problem. It's NOT being investigated by regulators. There have been various snipets that have come out that one side of the argument tries to contort into "being investigated". Sadly, article HAS been through arbitration and still this edit war carries on - even amongst the parties that were involved in the arbitration. There will NEVER be a solution to this article, and for all intents and purposes the business model is no longer even really practiced on the internet. Heck, even the name the article was created under ("scheme") implies some form of conspiracy or illegal behavior in spite of the fact that there's (for some reason) absolutely no law against it. [[User:Samoyed|Samoyed]] 05:09, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

::An edit war is not a reason to delete the article when the subject is controversial. [[User:Yakuman|Yakuman (数え役満)]] 05:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

*'''Keep'''. Notable and adequately sourced. --[[User:Carnildo|Carnildo]] 05:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

*'''Keep''' or '''Merge''' with [[Ponzi scheme]]. It is notable, regardless of the current state of the article. [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] 05:56, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

'''Strong Delete''' - This is the problem. It's NOT being investigated by regulators. There have been various snipets that have come out that one side of the argument tries to contort into "being investigated". Sadly, article HAS been through arbitration and still this edit war carries on - even amongst the parties that were involved in the arbitration. There will NEVER be a solution to this article, and for all intents and purposes the business model is no longer even really practiced on the internet. Heck, even the name the article was created under ("scheme") implies some form of conspiracy or illegal behavior in spite of the fact that there's (for some reason) absolutely no law against it. [[User:Samoyed|Samoyed]] 05:09, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

*'''Keep'''. Looks notable and referenced. And incoming links. [[User:Shenme|Shenme]] 06:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

*'''Speedy keep''', deletion is not the way to resolve an edit war. Plenty of [[WP:ATT|reliable sources]] are cited; [[WP:N|notability]] is firmly established. An edit war, no matter how prolonged, [[WP:DP#Discussion|is not a valid reason]] to delete a perfectly valid article. [[User:Krimpet|Krimpet]] ([[User talk:Krimpet|talk]]/[[Wikipedia:Editor review/Krimpet|review]]) 06:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

*'''Speedy Keep'''. AfD is not a way to solve edit wars, it is a way to delete articles that should be deleted. [[WP:AFD|read here]]. --[[User:Dennisthe2|Dennisthe2]] 06:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

*'''Strong Keep'''. Primary reason suggested for deletion (Matrixwatch.org link) is not even linked in the current article. [[User:Arzel|Arzel]] 15:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

*'''Keep'''. Although I feel that the article has changed out of all recognition, I feel the article itself is useful - if only to show in the history how the truth has been distorted! Ideally, I think that the article should return to the original mediated version from last year, as it currently fails to tell the whole truth. --[[User:Cybertrax|Cybertrax]] 22:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

*'''Speedy Keep'''. While AFD solves an edit war in this case, it also removes encyclopedic content. Seek assistance from administrators/mediators.--[[User:WaltCip|WaltCip]] 13:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>