Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nowheristan

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 was Delete — Caknuck 00:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nowheristan

  ATTENTION!

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}
Nowheristan (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)


No so much a micro-nation, more a macro-nation. Proclaimed in the presence of a UN representative but is it notable? -- RHaworth 12:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete - Absolutely no sources. This is just a self-promotional campaign for one artist. This is mentioned at his article as a project, so it's pointless as a separate article. Freshacconci | Talk 12:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Though well-written and somewhat amusing, it has no place here. WP:HOAX would probably suffice, but verifiability (tough for an non-existent place) and notability are both deal-breakers as well. ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 13:30, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I acknowledge that the movement may be a real one - but I can't find a shred of documentation from any reliable source that says so. If there is coverage out there, please provide links to sources and/or add them to the article. In the absence of independent sources that support the statements of the article, unfortunately, the article will likely be deleted. ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 12:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete Interesting experiment, 50k+ folk think so. Well written article, but not notable scope_creep 15:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete yet another fake "micronation". Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong keep i found an excellent article about it on the very serious UN forum, but there it is written Nowherestan with an e at the place of the i after the r. I love the concept.Faresov 21:55, 31 October 2007 (UTC)— Faresov (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • strong keep its an anlternative,a chance, maybe one day a solution.Strong keep —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.Carl.leman (talk • contribs) — Dr.Carl.leman (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Strong keep Remarkably ambitious project with fast growing popularity and notability: 50k+ members (supporters?), press articles in major papers and magazines in Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon.. + numerous blog entries. Foxbook 09:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)— Foxbook (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Comment. The following comment was incorrectly left on this AfD's talk page. Since this is the discussion, all comments should be placed here - please correct me if I erred. Accordingly, I have relocated the comment to this page, verbatim, highlighting the heading and the recommendation in the last line. ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 12:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia a "free" "encyclopedia"?

All the comments posted on the article NOWHERISTAN can be acceptable: those calling for the deletion and the others showing their support, but this depends on HOW we understand the leading concept of WIDKIPEDIA, claiming to be a "free" "encyclopedia", and WHO reads Wikipedia and WHERE in the world.

What is an "encyclopedia"? Following the definition given by the Cambridge dictionnary of language, it is "a book or set of books containing many articles arranged in alphabetical order which eather with the whole of human knowledge or a particular part of it".

Following the same dictionary "free" means "not limited or controlled".

Who reads Wikipedia? All those who are fed up with Encarta, Larousse, Universalis etc. etc. Those who are looking something else than the conventional traditional encyclopedias, those who are using a site that provides the information that not any other encyclopedia do.

Where are located the Wikipedia fans? Everywhere on the planet: Wikipedia exists in all the written languages of the world: european and anglo saxon languages, but also in Kurdi, Occitan, Tagalog, Scottish, Romani, Sardanian, armenian, basque and many other languages some of them spoken in very small regions or maybe one or two tribes...

That means that when ANYONE on the planet wants to FIND an information that not a single encylopedia can give, he goes to WIKIPEDIA.

For this, and being numerous now in Lebanon and also in many other countries (Egypt, France, USA, Yugoslavia...) to be interested by the NOWHERISTAN, I think we have the RIGHT to be informed, and Wikipedia "THE FREE ENCYCLOPEDIA" has the DUTY to give us the information.

That's why I want the article NOWHERISTAN be kept, with maybe light amendments that can make this article fit Wikipedia in the best way. --Siguiriya 12:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)— Siguiriya (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

  • Comment. Another misplaced !vote by HadySouaid was removed from the article's page itself. It is reproduced verbatim, below. ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 12:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong keep I do not find any reason to delete this article, but i insist to keep it, since it's a great idea, based on the biggest problem in the world, leading to war, which is "Identity" because this problem, is dividing, while the vision of Nowheristan is based on uniting the people all over the world, on many common things, instead of dividing them on small differences. Give freedom a chance ... help Nowheristan to become stronger —Preceding unsigned comment added by HadySouaid (talk • contribs) 06:49, 1 November 2007 — HadySouaid (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. —Freshacconci | Talk 14:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Is this another one of those "Things so small and secret that there's been no news on it, but trust me they exist" things? Or are there some actual sources? If they've been proclaimed to the UN, there should be. Until they show, though, Delete. --UsaSatsui 15:21, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
  • keep. Let's say that Nowheristan is more a concept than an existing place , more a philosophy than a project as it has been said. Is there no place in Wikipedia for ideas and philosophy? Nowheristan, despite being an ideacounts more than 50k citizens who supports its concept. A google search on Nowheristan will give you more than 1800 websites, in different countries, in different languages, and in very respectable and trusful places like newspapers and TVchannels, and many blogs are talking about it. For ex titlesearch for "nowheristan, or link titleor link titleor link titleor link titleor link titleand many many others... If someone wants to know what is Nowheristan or know more about Nowheristan, I believe that Wikipedia should give the answer.

A Nowheristani citizen (and proud to be) Siguiriya 22:40, 1 November 2007 (UTC)— Siguiriya (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

  • Strong Delete, seems to be nonsense no matter how many advocates are on wikipedia. Did you see the emperor picture??? -RiverHockey 13:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong delete. This article is utter rubbish: self-promotion of a ludicrous concept. If this AfD had not been going I might have speedily deleted it as G1. Sam Blacketer 13:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Sam Blacketer, thank you for expressing your opinion, but being the author of the article, I can hardly assume (though I do) good faith on your part when I read the tone of your comment. Bahaab 16:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
    • I am sorry if I have offended you, but I do tend to check these things. When I find that all your edits (apart from one minor change to spelling in France) are either connected to this micronation or its founder, and that you say you know him, then I do not think it is unreasonable to regard the article as being promotional. The article is in no sense written in encyclopaedic style; I can guarantee you that no encyclopaedia in the world would include a sentence like "Nowheristan is the first step on the way leading to Humanistan, passing through Everywheristan". This is a press release and not an encyclopaedia article. Finally the infobox gives the game away by claiming at one and the same time the whole world to be included, but yet only 50,000 people. There is no evidence that anyone takes this at all seriously. Sam Blacketer 16:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, currently non-notable as there doesn't appear to be verifiable sources at the moment so it fails WP:CRYSTAL. Further, it is written in so severe a non-npov style that it simply isn't salvagable. 75.128.225.15 21:44, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong keep. I dont understand the relentlessness to persecute this article... It is not offending, ethically correct, not antisemitic, not racist, and for those who seem not to have any sense of humor, the picture of the "emperor" is pure derision, a kind of caricature of the dictatorian regimes. And it happens that some people of Wikipedia readers are interested in other subjects than Ireland, the Irish culture and the Hockey. So please keep Nowheristan among your articles.Siguiriya 16:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
(EC) With respect, though you are welcome to comment on this discussion as much or as little as you wish, you may only enter one recommendation of Keep or Delete. This debate is not a strict Vote, nor is it a trial. It is a discussion of what to do with the article. The nominator of the article believes that it should be deleted because it does not meet Wikipedia's policies. If it can be shown to comply with those policies, or if it can be edited to conform to those policies, then it will be kept. Unfortunately, if it does not, it is possible that it will be deleted. A number of new users recommending that the article be kept will not be effective in keeping the article. If there are sources from newspapers or media coverage that discuss nowheristan, then we can use those as reliable sources, and the article might be kept. Blogs, unfortunately, don't meet the requirements for reliable sources, nor do sources affiliated with nowheristan itself. Best, ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 17:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Question: How many votes do you think you should get, Siguiriya? 204.38.54.172 19:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment to RiverHockey : did you say advocates? Advocates defend criminals and this article is not related to any crime or a criminal content! We can now mail to the 50k Nowheristani citizens asking them to register on Wikipedia and leave strong keeps. But we dont want and wont accept to act so. This article is purely informative, and does not need any advocate for its defense. We are asking that is remains in Wikipedia, where it founds its right place. Siguiriya 16:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

  • I'm afraid you are missing the point of Wikipedia. It is an encyclopedia like any other. As such, all articles need to be about notable subjects and require verifiable sources to establish notability. Wikipedia is not here to promote any idea or group, or to establish notability on any person or group's behalf. If this article fails any test of notability, an administrator may decide to delete it. As for inviting people to "vote", I need to remind you this is not a vote. It is a discussion. An administrator will read the debate and make a decision based on that, not the number of keep versus delete. I have seen deletion discussions end with a keep, even though the the number of deletes is greater, and I have seen the opposite as well. I would suggest you continue to contribute to Wikipedia on other articles and try writing this particular article at a later date, when you are able to establish notability with verifiable, neutral, third-party sources. You may want to read these links: WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:NOTE, which give information on Wikipedia policies. No one here is "persecuting" this article. We are all attempting to maintain certain standards. This is crucial for this project to succeed. You may find other articles which do not appear to have any more notability than this one. The size and scope of Wikipedia versus the number of dedicated editors (especially within the arts) is great, and it is sometimes difficult to find all the articles which fail Wikipedia's necessarily strict standards. Please do not take any of this personally, nor attribute any of this discussion as a value-judgment on the Nowheristan project or its creator. A worthwhile project may not currently meet notability standards, but this does not necessarily mean that this will always be the case. I think most of us here are in favour of including more rather than less to the overall Wikipedia project. But there are limits and we need to be vigilant. Thank you. freshacconci: speak to me 17:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Dear Siguiriya, advocate: to speak or write in favor of; support or urge by argument; recommend publicly: ie: He advocated the creation of an article for Nowheristan. I also see your first edit was just two days ago in defense of this article..... --RiverHockey 20:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I think the main problem in this debate is the denial of obvious realities. The users defending this article are obviously people who care about the project, and I don't find it surprising that they have only worked on this article or articles related to it. Using that as a reason (albeit implied) for deletion is a non-argument. I know no-one has actually said that, but it's the thinly veiled subtext of some of the comments here. While we should always aim for objectivity in Wikipedia, I don't believe that the majority of contributions here come from 100% 'disinterested people'. To the supporters of the project, I suggest you make the article much less self-referential. It's obvious that the project exists (otherwise you wouldn't be defending it), but you have to write about it "from the outside", and not from a Nowheristani point of view. I suggest you look at the article on Discordianism for a better idea of what I mean; the article treats the subject respectfully, but not from a Discordian point of view. Furthermore, you must get more references to satisfy the rules of notability; which, I would admit, are a little biased, because while many may have heard of Nowheristan in the Middle East (I've watched a segment about it on Lebanese television and attended a conference in Beirut that included adherents), you still need to prove it to Western readers before it becomes "real". -- Jadzilla 12:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment, upon further investigation I've found that every user who has voted keep has no other contributions on wikipedia, except those related to this debate, see top warning. -RiverHockey 01:14, 5 November 2007 (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.