Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Assumption by Russia of the Soviet Union's seat in the United Nations

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.
The result of the debate was KEEP. But improvement is expected, and possibly a rename. Golbez 18:16, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

Assumption by Russia of the Soviet Union's seat in the United Nations

POV rant. Created by Iasson, who has been blocked from editing Wikipedia. RickK 04:41, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, no indication that this hyperlegalistic view is widespread. The article doesn't look like Iasson's work at all. Gazpacho 05:36, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Although on presented evidence the view seems to be confined to someone called Yehuda Z. Blum, writing in 1992 and Mohamed Sid-Ahmed writing in 1999, the article is, or has potential to be, encyclopedic. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 10:55, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Doesn't sound like Iasson when read, but reading the contributions of the creator shows that you're correct. Might also be copied from somewhere. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 11:38, May 9, 2005 (UTC).
  • No, it is not copied from somewhere, although some parts are quoted or paraphrased. 205.217.105.2 13:08, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. I hereby refute allegations that this article was written by Iasson by stating that I am the same user as User:24.54.208.177, User:Rad Racer, User:SonicSynergy. As evidence, Iasson did not create featured articles, while I created three. However, because I try to resurrect his VFD voting system, I get falsely accused of being Iasson, and my articles put up for VFD for no reason. 205.217.105.2 13:03, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
  • If you're going to try to game the VfD system like Iasson did, you're going to be treated like Iasson did, beginning with the deletion of your invalid VfD votes. RickK 66.60.159.190 16:30, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

    Confusing non-linked "RickK" just before IP sig has been struck thru immediately above by me; could mislead some, as it momentarily did me, that it was signed by RickK. If it was from you, Rick, please come back and fix while logged in. --Jerzy~t 17:23, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

    • Restoring my signature yet again. Jerzy, STOP striking it out. RickK 22:52, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

      • • The redress already implicitly solicited, an hour ago, via User talk:Jerzy/My signature, now needs to appear here rather just on the page mentioned. --Jerzy~t 00:29, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
  • I offered possible evidence below an identity-related comment on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Wikipedia:Protocol Amending the Agreements, which may be a good place to consolidate identity and sanctions debate until that subject moves to a non-VfD location. --Jerzy~t 17:02, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Firebug 13:55, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Rationale, please? 205.217.105.2 15:03, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as POV and/or original research. Radiant_* 15:26, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
  • Opposing viewpoints have been added to the article, to mitigate the POV problem. It should be NPOV now. Mullerson's views on legality, and Russia's views on the veto, have been added. 205.217.105.2 16:12, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
• Comment Hey, it's not lasson- wake up and stop being a moron for those of you who don't get it. [Unsigned IP contrib per history].

  To enhance my earlier unsigned documentation, above, i am adding that the IP was User:159.169.57.3. -- Jerzy~t 21:00, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. After reading this article it's clear that this has a place here. It has interesting content and is well written with the info presented clearly. If nothing else, it serves as an example of how these types of issues should be layed out; format is key. [Unsigned IP contrib per history.]

  A probable sock removed the "IP" annotation above and replaced it with (quotes sic in his last version)

  'Tparker393 19:32, 9 May 2005 (UTC)tparker393'

  (which does include an unforged sig, whatever his relationship to the text he claims may be). The IP that anon'ly created the entry was, like the preceding entry, User:159.169.57.3.

• Keep, of course. Perfectly good subject. Everyking 16:41, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, but rephrase the POV parts. Otherwise fine topic. -Hmib 16:52, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
• Del, Transwiki to W-source, anything but keep or merge. Law student trivia: technical examination of a moot issue w/ very little chance of precedential value. (IANALB i doubt there is any wide informed disagreement; i'm pretty sure it's just that nobody really cares if he's right.) --Jerzy~t 17:02, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
• find a better title, or merge somewhere. the topic is fine. dab (ᛏ) 17:32, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, quite an interesting article. It could certainly need a new name, however. - SimonP 21:44, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Though a seemingly obscure diplomatic issue, this topic is well-worth space in an encyclopedia. The article seems comprehensive and sourced. Rename it if anyone can think of a better name. -Willmcw 02:12, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. First of all it's Iasson, and second of all the page smells copyvio'd. Not to mention I question its notability and accuracy as per all those above. Master Thief Garrett 02:29, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: how about a move to Legal aspects of the collapse of the Soviet Union, which could grow?
• Keep interesting, encyclopedic, referenced, looks NPOV. Grue 17:40, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. James F. (talk) 11:20, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per Grue's reasons + an important topic which requires coverage. Kappa 21:21, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, but, if at all possible, Rename to something less unwieldy. Thanks,
  Luc "Somethingorother" French 01:02, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep (MGarber50 forgot to sign off)

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.