Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BitTorrent open source License

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 of the debate was no consensus trending towards keep. --bainer (talk) 12:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiki to WikiSource, else delete. This does not belong here. Articles named after software licenses are usually informative and encyclopedic, not just carbon copies of the license verbatim. See GPL, GDFL, and BSD license. - Corbin ^{Be excellent} 21:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Transwiki and stub, which I'm doing. I need something to do and I'll get on it. Captainktainer * Talk 04:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Okay, the bloody thing has at least been partially transwikied. I'm convinced I'm not doing it right; it would be nice to have a guide on Meta or somewhere specifically dedicated to moving articles from Wikipedia to Wikisource, because the m:Transwiki article is... confusing. I'm working on writing an actually informative stub for the article. UPDATE: I just realized that if I wipe the page and start over, I could be interfering in the AfD and in the transwiki process. I'm not going to start until I know whether to start a new article (that conforms to the Manual of Style in its title) or wipe the current page and start over. Captainktainer * Talk 04:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It could be fixed to be a reasonably informative page comparatively to the GPL license and other related pages. Ansell 01:09, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Transwiki unless someone actually wants to write the article Ansell mentions right above me. Titoxd^(?!?) 01:21, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I dont mind a transwiki myself for the same reasons. Ansell 01:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• This page contains an interesting discussion of wikipedia's statement of license, considering that the "BitTorrent open source license" is not OSI approved. Not sure how this is relevant to this discussion but it was a piece of material I found while attempting to gather sources for a proper page. Ansell 02:04, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I have rewritten the page as a stub noting the controversy over the use of the "Open Source" trademark considering the lack of official OSI approval. Ansell 02:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keepable as it is now. --Ezeu 06:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Transwiki to WikiSource or redirect to BitTorrent.--John Lake 06:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I remind those calling for transwiki that the license text has already been transwikied to Wikisource. The page is at present a stub article about the license. Spacepotato 08:02, 7 July 2006 (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.