Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Manifesto of Mortarism

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 delete. – Sceptre ^(Talk) 10:32, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Manifesto of Mortarism

Literary work that has not been published yet. FreplySpang (talk) 14:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I am also nominating for deletion:

• Mortarism - an "emergent literary movement"; Wikipedia is not for predicting future events, but for reporting on movements/people who have already made an impression on the outside world.
• Marc di Saverio - the author of the manifesto and the founder of the movement. Has apparently been published in several periodicals (I don't know their circulation) but the article focuses on his not-yet-published works.

- FreplySpang (talk) 15:13, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. As per "Wikipedia is not a soapbox" in WP:NOT--blue520 15:36, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all, crystallballine vain soapboxery. Sandstein 19:29, 4 April 2006
• Delete all per WP:NOT & WP:BIO respectively.--Isotope23 19:37, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
• Brick it up in a wall per Edgar Allen Poe. Also delete. Haikupoet 01:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all per above. --Khoikhoi 05:09, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

(UTC) [edit]

• "John Reed Wiley" User talk -- di Saverio "Talk page"

The Manifesto of Mortarism/Maisonneuve/Marc di Saverio Please see MARC DI SAVERIO, and perhaps you may like to to write an article based on the stuff left on discussion board. Just a thought. Take care.

• this is Marc di Saverio. I can't see why I don't deserve a stub article. This is not SOAPBOXERY, as YOU understand it. After you have read the manifesto, you will understand that self-righteousness and literally going into the streets and standing on platforms is a part of changing the world. Soapboxery, eh!? That is a funny one. You have SO many other articles on wik you could be picking on; why mine? There are several articles that should be erased because they are inconsequential and many written of people who will never even come close to being immortals, or even surviving 20 years as important or substantial figures of time. The Manifesto of Mortarism/Marc di Saverio is history. I am manic, but I am not psychotic, and I am speaking absolutely honestly and with righteousness. WIK policy that I read said something along the lines of if an article stub SEEMS it COULD be POTENTIALLY important, "EXPAND!", or at least leave the article, or even shorten it; but DELETE!? That is simply the jealous spirit of wik writers who can't stand a man who will likley be important, and is not afraid to believe that, and is not afraid to go into the streets of Hamilton and stand on platforms to read his manifesto -- being a championed English undergrad -- or at McMaster, or wherever. MORTARISM will be one of those immortal philosophies. THE article OBVIOUSLY shows the subject is quite LIKELY going to be important, esp if you read the talk page -- and considering I am still a student for Chrissake. DELETION?! Pure Wikwriter jealousy? It's uncalled for to delete that page, and you all know it. You are acting

unprofessionally by putting your inferiority-complexes, Artist-envy, Genie-envy, before WIKIPEDIA, and PEOPLE'S EDUCATION.

• tell me freply, what is the "outside world". What the hell does that mean? Are you telling me a lot of those articles on wik describe people IMPACTING OUTSIDE WORLD. SURRRRRRE! Ok! Whatevah. Go bother with deleting someone who SHOULD be deleted. I impact the outside world every day on the streets, and I have ALSO DONE SO WITH PUBLICATIONS, and will with MAJOR FORTHCOMING PUBLICATIONS. A total deletion of my article would be extreme, uninspired, and ridiculously 21st century. O you Ice Agers! O the Age of Ice. O the Age of Passionlessness being fashionable. O the power of propaganda and media. We are living in the Age of Cutesypoo, the Age of Verveless and fashionable distance. Whatevah.

• • You know, a better tactic would be to read WP:BIO and WP:NOT, particularly the crystal ball clause, and provide evidence why these articles meet those criteria. Diatribes attacking those who have rendered opinions here is likely to fall on deaf ears. Expansion is only called for when an article could be potentially important based on existing information. Your statement that THE article OBVIOUSLY shows the subject is quite LIKELY going to be important shows that the Mortarism and The Manifesto of Mortarism in particular violate the crystal ball subsection of WP:NOT. If this movement become important or influential at some point in the future, a wikipedia article might be in order then. Right now it is premature.--Isotope23 18:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

• • As far as "likely to become notable"" or however you put it, Isotope23 is right to cite the crystal ball clause. Anybody can claim future notability, but it's a practice that means nothing in the grand scheme of things, and in fact is often a defining motif in what we might call outsider literature. I wish you luck in your art movement, but predictions have a way of going wrong. Please don't take it personally. Haikupoet 04:33, 6 April 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.