Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denis Salnikov hoax
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Delete. Redwolf24 00:04, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Denis Salnikov hoax
Vandalism: The user who created this page also made edits to other eXile pages which were designed to vilify the newspaper or its contributors rather than give information; Strange POV; Factually incorrect: how is it a "hoax" if there is no evidence that Salnikov is a pseudonym? There is evidence that this entry and others by user 199.107.55.222 are part of a campaign by Little Green Footballs readers who vowed revenge on the eXile following the recent posting of an article by Gary Brecher, who also came under attack by 199.107.55.222.
- Weird POV rant. Previously tagged for speedy but it doesn't seem to qualify as one. --malathion talk 20:13, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
- I think it does, malathion. Try A6 of the CSD. My vote is delete, and speedy delete if you agree on A6. Regards—Encephalon | ζ | Σ 21:31:25, 2005-08-13 (UTC)
- Keep.
see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/The eXile for further details(that was a strawman argument, see my comments below). --MarkSweep 00:23, 15 August 2005 (UTC)- COMMENT: Hi Mark. I'm sorry but I don't quite understand. The eXILE VfD was initiated by User:199.107.55.222 [1]. This was a very strongly worded VfD against an article on the eXILE magazine, and seems to have been motivated by reasons other than a concern for WP policy. When VfD editors started disagreeing with User:199.107.55.222's take on the article, he actually reworded his VfD even more harshly. [2]. The article proposed by malathion for deletion is a piece on one Denis Salnikov. It was written by User:199.107.55.222 [3]. From start to end, this article appears to be an unrelenting personal attack of Mr. Salnikov, and as malathion points out, there is no modifying view to counter the strident POV by the author. For some reason User:199.107.55.222 does not seem very fond of either eXILE or its employees. Anyway, I voted to delete this as it looks like a transparent attack piece. There is some question over whether it qualifies as a speedy; I think it just might under A6, which states that short articles that exist simply to disparage their subjects are candidates for speedy (the shortness of short is not defined). I don't think malathion agrees with that route, but there I agree with him about delete. Have I missed something about the article that convinced you it should stay? Regards—Encephalon | ζ | Σ 02:08:50, 2005-08-15 (UTC)
- Let me clarify: I think this is a worthwhile topic, that should be included in Wikipedia. Clearly the current version of the article is far from the standard set by the most brilliant prose on Wikipedia, but that means it should be improved, rather than deleted. I don't care whether the article is merged, renamed, etc. I'm merely stating my opinion that the "Denis Salnikov" affair is a topic that's, uhm, keep-worthy. --MarkSweep 01:53, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
- Mark, we are in fundamental agreement. The only reason my vote (delete) differs from yours (keep) is that I'm looking at this from the closer's POV, in which he has to decide whether the page at "Denis Whatsisname hoax" has to be deleted, or kept. Because we all agree the title is itself biased, it should be deleted (or as you say, "renamed"). A redirect is unsuitable for the same reason, and unnecessary if the new title contains his name anyway. I have absolutely no objection whatsoever to anyone writing an article now or in the future with a suitable title ("Denis Whatsis") and dealing with it with the NPOV. The reason I didn't vote "merge" is that there is nothing in the article that needs to be merged, there is no other article at present to merge to, and currently the article is itself an unrelenting personal attack from start to end, such that it really should be deleted on sight. WP should have as many good articles as possible and as few poor ones; but it should have zero personal attacks. Kind regards—Encephalon | ζ 16:31:05, 2005-08-18 (UTC)
- Let me clarify: I think this is a worthwhile topic, that should be included in Wikipedia. Clearly the current version of the article is far from the standard set by the most brilliant prose on Wikipedia, but that means it should be improved, rather than deleted. I don't care whether the article is merged, renamed, etc. I'm merely stating my opinion that the "Denis Salnikov" affair is a topic that's, uhm, keep-worthy. --MarkSweep 01:53, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
- COMMENT: Hi Mark. I'm sorry but I don't quite understand. The eXILE VfD was initiated by User:199.107.55.222 [1]. This was a very strongly worded VfD against an article on the eXILE magazine, and seems to have been motivated by reasons other than a concern for WP policy. When VfD editors started disagreeing with User:199.107.55.222's take on the article, he actually reworded his VfD even more harshly. [2]. The article proposed by malathion for deletion is a piece on one Denis Salnikov. It was written by User:199.107.55.222 [3]. From start to end, this article appears to be an unrelenting personal attack of Mr. Salnikov, and as malathion points out, there is no modifying view to counter the strident POV by the author. For some reason User:199.107.55.222 does not seem very fond of either eXILE or its employees. Anyway, I voted to delete this as it looks like a transparent attack piece. There is some question over whether it qualifies as a speedy; I think it just might under A6, which states that short articles that exist simply to disparage their subjects are candidates for speedy (the shortness of short is not defined). I don't think malathion agrees with that route, but there I agree with him about delete. Have I missed something about the article that convinced you it should stay? Regards—Encephalon | ζ | Σ 02:08:50, 2005-08-15 (UTC)
Rename to Denis Salnikov or Merge into the eXile, (edited see below). we should give an NPOV account of how it has been suggested that this is a fictional/satirical character, explain how his club review style etc. relates to eXile's style, and how he relates to the novi ruskii phenomenon. this personage is notable, even if he doesn't deserve its own article Dsol 16:36, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
-
- Dsol, the reason I urged delete is that the title seems to me irretrivably one sided. If the title page was just "David Whatsisname", it would be fine to simply edit the article to introduce the NPOV. In fact that would be the best solution. But this title should to be deleted. If an editor is interested in starting an article on David after that, he is entirely free to do so.—Encephalon | ζ 22:02:00, 2005-08-17 (UTC)
- Rename to Denis Salnikov or Merge into the eXile, but absolutely do not delete as per Dsol abakharev 04:37, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
OK, unless I've misunderstood something, there seems to be a disconnect here. Every one of the above voters is saying the same thing, but is using different words to vote. We agree: David Whatsis is notable, a good article on him is suitable for WP, the current article is a personal attack, the current title is too biased to be maintained even if a perfectly NPOV article on David is written in that title space. What this implies, I think, is a delete vote for the closer. When one says "rename", one is saying "delete the page and start a new one with a new name," because in effect that is what has to be done (if my understanding of the technical process is wrong I hope an admin will correct this statement). Do any one of the above voters have an objection to the following sequence of actions:
- Delete the page titled "Denis Salnikov hoax."
- Open a new page titled "Denis Salnikov."
- Write an NPOV article in that title space on David Salnikov.
- Alternatively, instead of 2 and 3, write an NPOV accont of Denis Salnikov in the eXILE article.
If you agree with the above, your vote is delete. If you disagree, it is keep, keep/redirect, or something else that requires maintenance of the page "Denis Salnikov hoax." Regards—Encephalon | ζ 16:47:45, 2005-08-18 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was a bit unclear, I guees my vote is Delete, but I meant that most of the content should be reused. Dsol 13:57, 19 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.