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 was delete.  Sandstein  05:48, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Libre (word) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previously deleted under the title "Libre" (see discussion), later undeleted and dragged through AFC after some cosmetic tweaks. The issues raised in the previous nomination have not been addressed at all; I think the nomination statement I wrote back then could stand today as-is. (I leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure what it speaks about the Articles for Creation process.) Here is a new rationale anyway.

This article spends most time discussing various strands of the broadly-construed free-culture movement (which is already covered elsewhere anyway), with a particular focus on using the word "libre" when referring to them, even if the references provided in the article do not even contain the word. After that, it goes off wild tangents in order to connect topics with very little to no relation to each other. Please especially take note of sentences like "Several albums with title tracks containing the word libre have achieved international acclaim and some have been nominated for Grammy Awards." (no citation for this, of course) and completely made-up claims like that the masks of Pussy Riot members are inspired by lucha libre wrestlers. No, they are not: this is simply what you end up with when you take a piece of cloth to conceal your face and cut some holes in it for the eyes and the mouth; there are very few degrees of freedom here in how the result may end up looking. This is silly pareidolia.

This is not an encyclopedia article, but an original-research, WP:COATRACK, rambling essay-like piece apparently written to advance an obscure-ish activist cause. Even if an article about the ostensible topic of this article (the word "libre") were warranted, it better be written from scratch. —Keφr 15:45, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the article is as bad as the nominator suggests. The page does nothing that the Libre disambiguation page doesn't already do. WP:NOT a dictionary. Power~enwiki (talk) 01:47, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Also consider deleting Gratis versus libre. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:04, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. – Uanfala (talk) 11:28, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. – Uanfala (talk) 11:28, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. – Uanfala (talk) 11:28, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. – Uanfala (talk) 11:28, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Not sure any of those sources discuss the concept of "Libre" in the sense of the article. Article seems to have come straight out of someone's head.Deathlibrarian (talk) 12:31, 30 May 2017 (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.