Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Res publica
without prejudice against someone writing an encyclopedic article on the topic in the future, since it is a dictionary definition and a repository of lengthy extracts from public domain sites. One alternative solution might be to stub it down, or to replace it with something from the 1911 Britannica. The nomination may arise from someone seeking to make a |point , but in fact it is a remarkably unencyclopedic piece of crappy writing, full of lines like "Already in Ancient Rome Res publica was a mixed-bag concept." It is a dictionary definition, better suited to Wiktionary than to an encyclopedia.   It is bloated with lengthy extracts totalling 1310 words consisting of public domain  classical writings and English translations, rather than having encyclopedic referencing of said works.  Wikipedia is not a repository for lengthy extracts from public domain files, per .  '''Note to closing administrator:'''  The "Keep" !votes are all either attacks on the nominator, or give no reason for keeping it, or say "I find it useful," or note that several people have edited it, or that it has been around a long time. None of those are valid "keep" arguments for AFDs
— User:Edison, 16:23, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:POINT||WP:NOT (Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point)