Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deponia

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 was keep. Mailer Diablo 17:10, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deponia

Deponia (deponija) means garbage dump. There is no official place called Deponia and all of the Roma settlements are regarded to as "unhygienic settlement" and if any official would name them 'deponija' it would be most probably considered as an insult. To conclude - this article is fake. Delete. Avala 19:40, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

• It may not be an official settlement, but there appears to be a widely recognized slum area near to Belgrade that is indeed known by this name, insulting or not. I've added citations to the article. Keep. Uncle G 00:25, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: This name is just a mistake used by foreign media. It does happen. Even the CNN reported in 1999 that Nato bombed "Okolina". In Serbia there is no such place and that words means "Vicinity". It was a popular joke for some time after the bombing so let's not create a joke on Wikipeda. Avala 10:36, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
    • First it means "garbage dump" and now it means "vicinity"? Please cite sources to back your argument up. Please cite sources giving the real name of the place, given your contention that this is not its real name. At present we have three sources saying that it is, and zero sources confirming what you assert. Uncle G 11:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
      • You didn`t even read what I wrote. OKOLINA means VICINITY and DEPONIJA means GARBAGE DUMP. The story about vicinity or okolina bombing appeared on CNN which is a pure example that such a ridicilous mistake can be made. They reported the bombing of the Okolina, like if they said there was the bombing of Vicinity with capital V. So if CNN can make such a rough translation mistake those smaller sources you are citing could do it as well. Like I said the official name is "unhygienic settlement" and you will get results on these Roma settlements if you type it in google. Unofficial names can be kartoncity, deponija, ciganmala... but they are definately not something we should put into encyclopedia. Just type deponija in Google and you will get photos and texts about garbage dumps but not Roma settlement. And when you search Deponia among serbian text websites you get nothing as it is not even a correct spelling. This is not the official name and we can`t use it. We can make an article Unhygienic settlements in Serbia where we would cite all of the names but the article carrying a name like this is definately a joke. Avala 12:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
        • I asked you to cite sources to back up your argument. Instead, you have simply repeated your argument. The source tally is still 3:0. Please cite sources. Uncle G 12:52, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Keep. I do not know much about quarters of Belgrade, but there is also quarter named Deponija in Novi Sad. See the map: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/20/Novi_sad_quarters.png So, it is not something unusual at all. If such settlement exist, there is no reason why article about it should not exist. PANONIAN (talk) 15:40, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

So they have a garbage dump in Novi Sad? That's amazing! --Lambiam^Talk 20:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

No, that was not the point. There is a garbage dump there all right, but there are also some people that live there, thus it is also a settlement, not only a garbage dump. I presume same thing is a case in Belgrade. PANONIAN (talk) 23:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

The thing is - it is a generic name. We can`t call it a Deponija with big D as such a settlement exists in every town and it is not even a settlement but homeless people living on landfill zone. Avala

Ok, maybe then name of the article should be moved to "Deponia, Belgrade", while "Deponia" could be disambiguation page describing other meanings of the word. PANONIAN (talk) 23:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. This page on the official Internet site of Belgrade systematically uses "deponija" in lower case, which appears to support Avala's claims. Disclaimer: my knowledge of Serbian is essentially absent. --Lambiam^Talk 21:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

That site obviously refer to garbage dump, not to settlement. :) PANONIAN (talk) 23:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. On the other hand, I found several references from .yu web sites using "Deponija" as the name of a settlement: [1], [2], [3]; the last is from the University of Belgrade. The first and last put quotes around "Deponija", presumably because this – although used as a name – is not considered an official name. Still, the settlement exists, and this appears to be the common way of referring to it. A compromise position may be to rename the article to "Deponija" settlement or Deponija (settlement). --Lambiam^Talk 22:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep but rename to Deponija for the start or, better still, to Deponija (Belgrade); I guess many ex-Yu cities have something like that. The settlement is of course not officially called like that because it officialy does not exist. Duja 13:52, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, many of the city quarters in the Serbian cities officially do not exist. Cities are usually divided into "mesne zajednice" ("local communities"), which may or may not correspond with traditional or known city quarters. Officially, only "mesne zajednice" exist, and everything else is unofficial. PANONIAN (talk) 16:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Every city has slums, its not a shame PajaBG 11:57, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  • yes slums and not Slums. Avala 13:53, 29 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.