Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Industrial property
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 Redirected to intellectual property.--Eloquence* 22:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Industrial property
Smells like either neulogism or original research. Weak delete. --Nlu (talk) 04:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
- Redirect to Property#Types of property. —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-02 09:02Z
- Redirect to intellectual property, the article mentions only types of IP. A quick look at a Butterworth's legal dictionary (albeit an Australian one) reveals it is not a legal term of art as it is not mentioned. It is possible this is referring to patents or designs law as distinct from all types of IP including copyrights and trade marks, but it is still redundant. SM247My Talk 10:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- I don't think that's a good redirect, since there is no evidence that "industrial property" actually refers to IP, as opposed to, say factories and tools. --MCB 05:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Comment Arguable. The only real evidence I can offer (and very scant at that) is the name of the subject I took last semester at uni, Intellectual and Industrial Property Law. I'm sure its an accurate term, but not one to merit an article. SM247My Talk 23:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- Transwiki to Wiktionary. Ste4k 17:45, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as unsourced OR, bordering on nonsense. I am unable to find any references that confirm the author's assertion that "industrial property" refers to "the intangible assets of commercially active juristic persons". --MCB 05:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- Redirect to Intellectual property. I believe that in some countries IP is "industrial property", not "intellectual property". See this link from the Japanese Patent Office [1]. I believe a small mention of the distinction between "intellectual" and "industrial" property would then be merited at Intellectual property. --AbsolutDan (talk) 19:11, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- 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.
