Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blogger's contract: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:34, 2 April 2005

Latest revision as of 06:35, 24 April 2006

(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)

Line 1:

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

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below[[Template:Vfd top|.]] '''This page is no longer live.''' Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. <br >The result of the debate was '''copyvio'''. &ndash; [[User:ABCD|AB]][[User talk:ABCD|'''''CD''''']] 19:34, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

===[[Blogger's contract]]===

Unencyclopedic. Google search reveals few hits, which for anything related to blogs doesn't bode well; doesn't seem to be widely used. [[User:Mindspillage|Mindspillage]] [[User talk:Mindspillage|(spill yours?)]] 15:56, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Line 6:

*I tagged it as '''copyvio''' from [http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:kRTAJ0H-Z6UJ:www.landmark-project.com/blogmeister/bloggers_contract.doc+%22Acknowledging+that+blogging+is+a+legitimate%22+contract&hl=en here] [[User:DaveTheRed|DaveTheRed]] 23:36, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. '''Please do not edit this page'''[[Template:Vfd bottom|.]]

</div >