Talk:Janicism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on December 2, 2006. The result of the discussion was Speedy Delete.

Janicism is a minority religion, but a real one nonetheless, and definitely not simply a test. Under the Vandalism defenition, this would not be counted as vandalism. Thank you. Ichbinbored 10:05, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


Janicism is a factual article. All things start off small, and Janicism wont expand suddenly overnight. The fact is, Janicism is a real religion. There are people who follow it, and therefore I maintain they have a right to have it documented on Wikipedia, which is why I wrote the article (which has since been expanded by a fellow practicing Janicist, showing it is not false.) I strongly believe that this article should be upheld in the public view. There is proof this is not false. Please be patient while the article is developed further. THANKYOUMlc409 10:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

It seems that proof of existence is required. First link I've found is here: [1] It is the 3rd entry down.

Your "source" blog is a complete hoax. It is made up of entries from three other blogs: http://coppersblog.blogspot.com/ [2] [3] [4], http://bluesandtwos.blogspot.com/ [5] [6], and http://jes.blogs.shellprompt.net/ [7]. The only original entry is your "source" on this hoax religion. Frankly, at this point you are guilty of plageurism for stealing other people's content and passing it off as someone else's in your attempt to create false sources. IrishGuy talk 19:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

FRANKLY: - I don't care what you say or think : you are insignificant to me! - It's a shame that all Wikipedia is seems to be a rip off of other people's work. Why can't it have original content? - oh and Engerrrlandddd!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mlc409 (talk • contribs).

How amazingly mature. Wikipedia isn't a rip off. Your blog is a rip off...it uses other people's work without their permission and doesn't admit that it is stolen content. Wikipedia, on the other hand, cites sources so the information is verifiable. Original work isn't verifiable and therefore cannot be substantiated as truth. IrishGuy talk 21:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD this

This is a total load of bullshit.

--Segin 19:05, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article deleted

I've speedily deleted the article (and protected it from recreation). In the interest of improving the encyclopedia, however, I'm leaving the talk page in place; if this religion ever does become notable enough to warrant a real article, this is the place to make that argument. EVula // talk // ☯ // 02:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/a/n/Talk%7EJanicism_0eda.html"