Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay and lesbian kingdom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 - no consensus --Ichiro 05:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gay and lesbian kingdom and Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands

nn micronation. Only 70 unique Google hits. Note that there was previously an AfD for Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands. User:Zoe|(talk) 05:35, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Having looked more closely at the articles, there's nothing to merge. And although it's not a true micronation, it's a verifiable historical event. --LesleyW 07:56, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, micronations are not notable, --Jaranda wat's sup 08:06, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
    • They're notable if they get noticed. Gazpacho 08:23, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Redirect Gay and lesbian kingdom to Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands as they appear to talk about the same place and the latter is a better article at first glance. The information is verifiable and Wikipedia has articles on other micronations. Movementarian 08:30, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge Two pages covering the same subject is a waste of server space. -- (aeropagitica) UK 09:21, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: I found Lesbian Kingdom, too - but it was identical to the above, so it's now a redirect to Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands. If the vote here is for delete, that will need to go, too. Grutness...wha? 09:23, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Happy new year! Keep Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands and redirect and merge the other article into it. Blackcats 10:22, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete both, a handful of activists going for a picnic does not make a micronation and shouldn't make an article. --Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 11:35, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Vanity. CalJW 11:58, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect Gay and lesbian kingdom to Keep Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands. Notable micronation. --Billpg 12:03, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I say keep it, it is a proven historical event that recieved a great deal of press coverage in Australia and within the worlds gay media. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wowfm (talk • contribs) (moved from talk page)
  • Merge Gay and lesbian kingdom into Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands--MONGO 12:11, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I know it won't count, but delete both anyway. Ambi 13:56, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. 70 unique Google hits speaks volumes here. Even small, obscure real nations have Google hits well into the many millions. Compare Tobago for just one example. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:28, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Sarah Ewart 14:29, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • #REDIRECT [[Paradise]] Er, I mean Commment Doesn't something substantially have to have changed for the latter page to be renominated? It survived with a Keep, not even a No consensus. pfctdayelise 14:47, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment While checking out the hits, I noticed that Australia's Attorney-General department mentions "Declaration of Independence of the Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands - Office of International Law ( OIL )". By means of comparison, Hutt River Province does not appear to have hits in ag.gov.au (it has hits elsewhere, especially in the Australian Tax Office). I think that one factor for notability would be how many people (and how many notable people) were involved in this protest. Andjam 15:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
    • There's a micronations wikicity. If the article gets deleted, should it be copied to there? Andjam 15:59, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Agree with Squiddy. --Daveb 15:17, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete both. An encyclopedia is supposed to inform people, not misinform them. This is just sillieness, which discredits the project. --Rob 15:22, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete both per Squiddy. WhiteNight T | @ | C 17:12, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • KEEP Despite what people think, the Kingdom got wide press coverage in Australia and within the worlds Gay media and is an historical fact! The Australian Attorney-Generals department mentions "Declaration of Independence of the Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands - Office of International Law (OIL)" and whilst no nation is yet to recognise the Kingdoms sovereignty neither does any country recognise Quebec and its fight of independance within Canada yet Quebec's plight is widly covered. good on them I say and please keep! John Hong Kong—Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.29.220.30 (talk • contribs)
  • Keep Survived AfD once already and there's no new reason why this should be deleted. I would like to know who keeps putting this page up for deletion and why? my only guess is that there is a homophobe within this organisation that does not agree with its content. The events took place and a search of the Attorney-Generals department in Australia mentions the Kingdom, as well as Independence documents were lodged with the United Nations in New York and the ICJ (International Court of Justice) in the Hague. There is much interest in the Kingdom in Australia particularly with the government of Australia winding back gay and lesbian rights, banning gay marriages, and removing gay and lesbian rights from its human rights charter so I say keep it!!! Sally New Zealand.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.29.220.30 (talk • contribs)
  • Keep see Conch Republic David Brisbane Australia.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.29.220.30 (talk • contribs)
  • Keep Whilst the Kingdom is not a micronation as such because the Coral Sea Islands are an external uninhabited Territory of Australia. the facts as stated in the page are true and correct. I agree with Sally and would like to know who the person is and why they keep putting this page up for deletion as it has survived AFD once already. Sucki Thialand—Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.29.220.30 (talk • contribs)
    • What do you mean by "keep putting this page up for deletion"? This is the first time I have put this page up for deletion. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:40, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
    • This is a discussion, not a vote by the numbers. Anonymous comments and ballot-stuffing are not accepted and may turn opinion against the article. Gazpacho 23:59, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Gazpacho, We are a group of international backpackers working on Great Keppell Island, a remote island off the east coast of Australia and there is only two computers on the Island, and we signed our comments so they are not Anonymous! Please get your facts right before you make such comments!!!. We all feel this article should be kept and cant understand why this article is up for deletion again when this article has allready gone through this entire process just recently and survived. Sucki, Sally, John & David, 5:20 2nd of Jan 2006. (from 203.164.228.20)
      • Any user identified only by an IP address is considered to be anonymous. Movementarian 09:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep; and redirect "Gay and lesbian kingdom" to formal title. Gilliamjf 03:15, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Generally speaking, micronations are non notable and this one particularly so. Roisterer 10:02, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment the version Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands had an AfD in May 2005: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gay_and_Lesbian_Kingdom_of_the_Coral_Sea_Islands. --Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 10:37, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect Gay and lesbian kingdom to Keep Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands. Notable micronation. --Wowfm 20:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Image:Glk.jpg
  • Delete both. Australia has no ambassador to this "country" so therefore it should not be considered legit. Wikipedia should not be lending credibility to these fraudulent claims. Qarnos 22:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Australia does not have an ambassador to Quebec, or Palestine or the Conch Republic yet all these movements for sovereignty have articles listed so why not this one? Wowfm 23:15, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, obviously. Carolynparrishfan 01:12, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, seems article worthy (but turn Gay and lesbian kingdom into a redirect.)-- Samuel Wantman 01:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, verifiable historical event. Seems important to gay rights movement in the area. Kit 02:39, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - real, verifiable, notable. I've mainly heard about this in non-internet form, via newspapers or magazines. - Trysha (talk) 03:05, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep verifiable, if somewhat obscure, article. Secession received news coverage. Interesting twist on the same-sex marriage debate. - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 04:41, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep -- Astrokey44|talk 13:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep -- Wow! Who knew this island existed before they read the article? This article definitely need to be in Wikipedia. I believe Wikipedia is not only for looking things up, but also for wandering about and finding facts new to oneself. Also, it is verifiable and has been published on. -- ActiveSelective 09:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep --Terence Ong Talk 14:09, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Micronations are unencyclopedic and this has only a few Google hits. Agree with Zoe. Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. This is definitely a noteworthy micronation. --Victim of signature fascism | help remove biblecruft 19:20, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable and legally nonexistant --Ajdz 22:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. This project is an important part of the history of Queer Nationalism, however ridiculous such a thing might appear at the first glance. Gay Kingdom has enjoyed much attention in the year 2004 and is of course worthy of an article. The Yahoo discussion group for the Gay Kingdom is listing >700 members, this clearly documents the interest on the issue. The group is fallen apart into several fragments but it gave impulses for further developements. However, the article needs a critical re-work. | Vanrozenheim 02:05, 6 January 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.