Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patent jock (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
should not be taken into account |
should not be taken into account |
||
Line 29:
*'''Keep''' While the discussion has been interesting, puppets aside, I repeat my earlier posting that I am familiar with this term. I don't know about the rest of the wikipedia users, but I believe the strength of wikipedia is to provide '''everyone''' with descriptions of terms that are not only common, but also those that may be somewhat rare and used in certain circles. Otherwise, this tool is useless and fails. I may not be familiar with what terms an astronaut or garbage man uses, but I do know patents. I have worked in Boston, Atlanta, Los Angeles and New York. In each of these locations I have heard patent practitioners use this term in same fashion as the description provides. Just because a websearch provides minimal sources should only be A factor in deciding if this term is a neologism. Baker Botts is a reputable and well-known patent powerhouse, and they used this term in 2002. And I find that just because the author failed to define the term "patent jock" in his article to be a ridiculous argument. One skilled in the art, ahhm...a patent jock, understands this use usage as should a lay reader. I find jyancey to be on point, as is Jfredericks. Do not delete.--[[User:Patentgeek|Patentgeek]] 01:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
**Personal testimony of pseudonymous Wikipedia editors is not enough. [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|We require sources here]]. So far you have not only not provided any but also now stated that you find it "ridiculous" that they should be required. If you don't share our principles of verifiability, then you will find another web site elsewhere a better fit to your needs. You could try putting some content on that empty one that I mentioned above. [[User:Uncle G|Uncle G]] 02:38, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
** I take the view that [[User:Patentgeek|Patentgeek]] may be a [[Wikipedia:sock puppet|sock puppet]] ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Patentgeek contributions]) and that his/her vote '''should be not be taken into account'''.--[[User:Edcolins|Edcolins]] 07:54, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
* '''WEAK KEEP''' - I know this doesn't actually verify the definition of patent jock, but it DOES show that it is used within the industry. See http://patentlaw.typepad.com/patent/2004/11/what_five_thing.html, where Dennis Crouch (one of the "notable" patent attorneys listed in the wikipedia listing of "[[patent attorney]]") uses the term patent jockey.--[[User:24.196.237.72|24.196.237.72]] 03:20, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
** I take the view that [[User:24.196.237.72|24.196.237.72]] may be a [[Wikipedia:sock puppet|sock puppet]] ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=24.196.237.72 contributions]) and that his/her vote '''should be not be taken into account'''.--[[User:Edcolins|Edcolins]] 07:54, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
| |||