564:
of legislation are clearly not any of the things described by CSD A7.) Secondly, saying that X is a piece of legislation (that creates rights and duties) is an assertion of importance in of itself. A court can order a person to obey any piece of legislation by means of an injunction or prerogative order. If he does not do as he is told, he can be committed to prison for contempt of court, possibly for years at a time. And being in danger of being sent to prison is rather significant. And that is before you consider the rights of access to information that the thing actually creates and the limitations it places on them, which are obviously going to be of enormous practical importance. And freedom of information and privacy are matters of enormous public concern. And this is
315:
563:
Firstly, CSD A7 does not apply to legislation. (The authentic text of a piece of legislation is typically a physical object, namely a document written or printed on a substance such as vellum and held in a secure building. Paper copies are normally issued. And the rights and duties created by a piece
199:
As I don't believe this article meets GNG, as all of its media mentions seem to be "trivial" (i.e., the information was secured under the
Freedom of ...), I thought I would bring it here for a discussion. This seems to me like somewhat of a gray area, so I appreciate ensuing counterarguments that may
756:
law for the public sector in
Ontario - internationally recognized as a fundamental human right - to say it is not notable is frankly nonsense. The article is not well formed at all but that is not a valid reason for deletion. There are bound to be numerous sources available to improve this article,
694:
4/"Insisting on having a more or less complete article from the outset would defeat the whole point of having a wiki." ...what? This is not even a Stub yet (that still deserves its {{dead end}} tag). That's why it is common to spin out articles. When they become unwieldy housed in the parent, they
646:
There is content in this article that isn't in the proposed merger target. "RSO 1990 c F31" is a reference to a collection of revised statutes and is presumably an acceptable form of citation. For some reason it has been omitted from the proposed merger target. And the proposed merger target does
690:
3/someone will do it sooner or later... so let it be spun out of the parent article at a time when it is consensus of the maintainers of the parent
Article. No need to start by creating duplication with 2 sets of Editors watching 2 different sets of Articles that are about the same
416:. The sources only have to exist. A simple search of GBooks confirms that they do. (Hint: "Ontario" is not always part of the name, other names such as "FIPPA" and "RSO 1990 c F31" are also used, and there are sometimes problems with character recognition). There is no
168:
668:
Insisting on having a more or less complete article from the outset would defeat the whole point of having a wiki. The reason that
Knowledge (XXG) articles are built in lots of small steps is because it has been found to be quicker and more efficient.
94:
89:
98:
653:
If it is possible to write a decent article on something, someone will do it sooner or later (provided they are not pestered with impatient Afd nominations). It is as inevitable as death and taxes. "There's no end to the writing of books".
81:
634:
ever get rewritten so that it gets "split off again" ? Creating a redirect now would seem like a good way to direct an editor intrested in the subject to where others are working on the same subject, without causing duplication.
162:
442:
of the articles themselves. There's no real value in permanently keeping a bad, uninformative and largely unsourced article that nobody's taking any time and initiative to actually work on, just because it remains
85:
686:
2/delete this article first because it is "A abridged regurgitation of what the law is" nothing more, no prose, no citations, no comparable laws, nothing. (aka WP:NOTREPOSITORY re:Public domain or other source
265:# 3: "Knowledge (XXG) articles are not merely collections of Public domain or other source material such as ... laws ... that are only useful when presented with their original, unmodified wording." --
77:
69:
128:
547:
The article does not indicate why it is important in the slightest. There's an article to be made about the subject, but there's no meaningful article there at all. No assertion of notability.
630:
I never said anything about a merge. A abridged regurgitation of what the law is, is not what the wiki is supposed to be, as the actual source can show that in MUCH better detail. Who says it
650:
Your answer does not explain why you want to delete this article first, bearing in mind that will consume greater system resources than just redirecting it and will waste a sysop's time.
606:
Why would we want to delete it first? That is not how articles are merged unless their content is unnacceptable (e.g. copyvio and libel and OR and things that violate NOT and the like).
121:
183:
592:
150:
695:
get spun out with proper linking back to the parent, and a précis in the parent. There is nothing here TO précis because it is "A abridged regurgitation of what the law is".
800:
783:
766:
744:
726:"no comparable laws" - Are they necessary? I would be more interested in finding amendments, subordinate legislation and case law. Things that are normally more important.
701:
678:
663:
641:
625:
601:
577:
556:
535:
502:
472:
429:
405:
383:
356:
327:
294:
285:
NOTREPOSITORY is not now relevant. I have expanded the article so that it now consists of more than just an extract, and the article is capable of being expanded further.
276:
250:
235:
220:
63:
591:. It's explained 'in context' with other similar provincial laws there. At least until such time as a real article can replace this 'sub-stub'. I personally would bundle
228:
714:"so correct the link that is in the target (its just an older version of what you have shown)" - I am afraid that I don't follow. There is more than a link missing.
144:
683:
1/"content in this article that isn't in the proposed merger target" so correct the link that is in the target (its just an older version of what you have shown)
243:
140:
420:
for incorporating information from those sources into the article. The nominator is in fact required to attempt to do that himself before any nomination.
190:
493:) 00:13, 10 December 2013 (UTC) And it is more difficult because it involves additional research and typing and can only be done by a registered user.
568:
statute dealing with those matters in
Ontario. All of this is a bit academic since the Act clearly satisfies GNG and that really is the bottom line.
732:"not even a Stub yet" - This article has been assessed as a stub by an enormously experienced editor. I have no doubt that assessment is correct.
156:
455:
any more difficult to start a new article from scratch than it is to add improvements to one that already exists, so the fact that somebody
723:"no citations" - "RSO 1990 c F31" is a citation. It means chapter F31 of the 1990 edition of a book called The Revised Statutes of Ontario.
451:
get around to improving it eventually — if and when somebody is prepared to finally put some effort into an underperforming article, it is
396:, though this should potentially be revisited after a period of time if no serious attempt to beef the article up has actually been made.
477:
What you suggest is not policy, and I would be strongly opposed to it becoming policy, because it would probably kill the encyclopedia.
214:
17:
610:
588:
388:
Article needs content and sourcing improvements, certainly, but it seems pretty clear to me that an FOI/privacy law is a
819:
735:"that still deserves its dead end tag" -That template is only for articles that have no internal links. This one does.
616:
I must say that I think there is no point in merging this to split it off again, which is what will eventually happen.
40:
262:
647:
not, unlike this article, condescend to explain, where it does use it, what the abbreviation "RSO" means either.
552:
207:
753:
815:
791:- Landmark provincial-level legislation — in Canada's most populous province, to boot. Sources showing.
531:
434:
There is, or should be, a point at which
Knowledge (XXG) begins to concern itself not just with the raw
352:
247:
232:
36:
762:
176:
516:
413:
337:
779:
740:
674:
659:
621:
573:
548:
498:
490:
482:
425:
323:
311:
290:
202:
57:
796:
468:
401:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
814:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
757:
although I suspect many will be offline sources. I'm going to go see what I can do with it.
527:
348:
758:
379:
272:
389:
775:
736:
670:
655:
617:
569:
494:
486:
478:
421:
369:
319:
307:
286:
54:
792:
464:
397:
115:
459:
theoretically improve an article isn't a compelling argument if nobody actually
519:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
340:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
374:
266:
485:) 23:43, 9 December 2013 (UTC) And "quantity has its own quality".
306:
This Act satisfies GNG. There is sufficient coverage in textbooks.
808:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
720:
NOTREPOSITORY - The first sentence is not copied from anything.
78:
Freedom of
Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Ontario)
70:
Freedom of
Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Ontario)
609:
I would hesitate to describe the extremely brief material in
111:
107:
103:
200:
favor it being kept, but discussion seemed necessary.
175:
318:, for one example, is clearly not a trivial mention.
593:
526:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
347:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
189:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
822:). No further edits should be made to this page.
729:"nothing" - The article is clearly not empty.
8:
242:Note: This debate has been included in the
229:list of Ontario-related deletion discussions
227:Note: This debate has been included in the
241:
226:
717:"no prose" - The first sentence is prose.
244:list of Law-related deletion discussions
438:of article topics, but with the actual
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
752:. This Act is the codification of
412:That would not be compatible with
24:
774:This article has been expanded.
611:Freedom of information in Canada
589:Freedom of information in Canada
314:) 11:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
1:
801:04:13, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
784:00:15, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
767:16:38, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
745:09:47, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
702:09:25, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
679:08:17, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
664:08:07, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
642:07:48, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
626:07:33, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
602:07:03, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
578:02:39, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
557:02:13, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
536:01:32, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
503:00:33, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
277:14:40, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
251:07:23, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
236:07:23, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
221:05:18, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
64:07:29, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
473:23:07, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
430:22:14, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
406:18:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
392:article topic in principle.
384:20:56, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
357:02:31, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
328:13:00, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
295:14:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
839:
368:, agree with analysis by
811:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
463:improving the article.
754:freedom of information
585:Delete & redirect
372:, above. Cheers, —
613:as an explanation.
595:in with this AFD.
545:Speedy Delete - A7
261:. Clearly against
48:The result was
700:
640:
600:
538:
359:
304:Keep and improve.
253:
238:
830:
813:
750:Very strong keep
699:
698:
639:
638:
599:
598:
525:
521:
346:
342:
263:WP:NOTREPOSITORY
248:Northamerica1000
233:Northamerica1000
217:
212:
205:
194:
193:
179:
131:
119:
101:
60:
34:
838:
837:
833:
832:
831:
829:
828:
827:
826:
820:deletion review
809:
696:
636:
596:
514:
335:
275:
215:
208:
203:
136:
127:
92:
76:
73:
58:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
836:
834:
825:
824:
804:
803:
786:
769:
747:
733:
730:
727:
724:
721:
718:
715:
712:
711:
710:
709:
708:
707:
706:
705:
704:
692:
688:
684:
666:
651:
648:
614:
607:
581:
580:
560:
559:
541:
540:
539:
523:
522:
511:
510:
509:
508:
507:
506:
505:
447:that somebody
409:
408:
386:
362:
361:
360:
344:
343:
332:
331:
330:
300:
299:
298:
297:
280:
279:
271:
255:
254:
239:
197:
196:
133:
72:
67:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
835:
823:
821:
817:
812:
806:
805:
802:
798:
794:
790:
787:
785:
781:
777:
773:
770:
768:
764:
760:
755:
751:
748:
746:
742:
738:
734:
731:
728:
725:
722:
719:
716:
713:
703:
693:
689:
685:
682:
681:
680:
676:
672:
667:
665:
661:
657:
652:
649:
645:
644:
643:
633:
629:
628:
627:
623:
619:
615:
612:
608:
605:
604:
603:
594:
590:
586:
583:
582:
579:
575:
571:
567:
562:
561:
558:
554:
550:
549:Neonchameleon
546:
543:
542:
537:
533:
529:
524:
520:
518:
513:
512:
504:
500:
496:
492:
488:
484:
480:
476:
475:
474:
470:
466:
462:
458:
454:
450:
446:
441:
437:
433:
432:
431:
427:
423:
419:
415:
411:
410:
407:
403:
399:
395:
391:
387:
385:
381:
377:
376:
371:
367:
364:
363:
358:
354:
350:
345:
341:
339:
334:
333:
329:
325:
321:
317:
313:
309:
305:
302:
301:
296:
292:
288:
284:
283:
282:
281:
278:
274:
270:
269:
264:
260:
257:
256:
252:
249:
245:
240:
237:
234:
230:
225:
224:
223:
222:
219:
218:
213:
211:
206:
192:
188:
185:
182:
178:
174:
170:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
142:
139:
138:Find sources:
134:
130:
126:
123:
117:
113:
109:
105:
100:
96:
91:
87:
83:
79:
75:
74:
71:
68:
66:
65:
62:
61:
56:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
810:
807:
788:
771:
749:
631:
584:
565:
544:
515:
460:
456:
452:
448:
444:
439:
435:
417:
393:
373:
365:
336:
303:
267:
258:
209:
201:
198:
186:
180:
172:
165:
159:
153:
147:
137:
124:
53:
49:
47:
31:
28:
528:Mark Arsten
349:Mark Arsten
163:free images
759:Ivanvector
816:talk page
697:Exit2DOS
687:material)
637:Exit2DOS
597:Exit2DOS
414:WP:BEFORE
394:Weak keep
210:Phightins
37:talk page
818:or in a
776:James500
772:Comment.
737:James500
671:James500
656:James500
618:James500
570:James500
517:Relisted
495:James500
487:James500
479:James500
445:possible
422:James500
418:deadline
370:James500
338:Relisted
320:James500
308:James500
287:James500
122:View log
39:or in a
793:Carrite
465:Bearcat
440:quality
398:Bearcat
390:notable
268:P 1 9 9
169:WP refs
157:scholar
95:protect
90:history
59:Faraone
691:thing.
436:volume
259:Delete
141:Google
99:delete
457:could
449:might
184:JSTOR
145:books
129:Stats
116:views
108:watch
104:links
16:<
797:talk
789:Keep
780:talk
763:talk
741:talk
675:talk
660:talk
632:will
622:talk
574:talk
553:talk
532:talk
499:talk
491:talk
483:talk
469:talk
426:talk
402:talk
380:talk
375:Cirt
366:Keep
353:talk
324:talk
316:This
312:talk
291:talk
177:FENS
151:news
112:logs
86:talk
82:edit
50:keep
587:to
566:the
453:not
191:TWL
120:– (
799:)
782:)
765:)
743:)
677:)
662:)
624:)
576:)
555:)
534:)
501:)
471:)
461:is
428:)
404:)
382:)
355:)
326:)
293:)
246:.
231:.
204:Go
171:)
114:|
110:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
88:|
84:|
52:.
795:(
778:(
761:(
739:(
673:(
658:(
620:(
572:(
551:(
530:(
497:(
489:(
481:(
467:(
424:(
400:(
378:(
351:(
322:(
310:(
289:(
273:✉
216:!
195:)
187:·
181:·
173:·
166:·
160:·
154:·
148:·
143:(
135:(
132:)
125:·
118:)
80:(
55:L
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.