Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Principality of Tartupaluk

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. – Avi 00:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Principality of Tartupaluk

A student and his project, and basically un-important satire, in lack of a better word. You can’t call it a hoax. Someone claiming Hans Island as a new “nation”. Indorsing something like this on wiki is not only demeaning for an encyclopedia, it is to open the door for every two-cent fun property claim out there. Normally I would put something like this up for speed delete, but lets hear what others have to say. Twthmoses 02:40, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete. Ultra NN "micronations" on WP, boring. Pavel Vozenilek 02:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep This principality may not be as renowned as Sealand, but it's apparently real and notorious enough to have independent sources writing about it.--Húsönd 03:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
This is neither real nor notorious! and in no way comparable to Sealand. At best half a dozen obscure online news outlets spend a few words on this. They don’t do it because “Principality of Tartupaluk” is news, but because “Hans Island” is in dispute and apparently news worthy. This student who “invented” this 2 month ago, is only trying to cash in on the fuzz. The very best indicator that this is rubbish and not notable at all, is that it is only the “project manager” himself that is trying to get it on wiki! Just tab in Principality of Tartupaluk in goggle = what story? Twthmoses 17:52, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
I acknowledge your point, but I am concerned about this. This principality is a recent nonsense alright, but it's a nonsense conforming to WP:V. This seems to be an example of an article that could be allowed to stay and be listed on Wikipedia:Unusual articles.--Húsönd 18:32, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, nonsense of no significance. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:23, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete micronation that's "existed" for two months? Silliness. Opabinia regalis 03:32, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete stupid. Danny Lilithborne 04:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. MER-C 05:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. Some random person looking for his 15 minutes of fame does not notability make. Resolute 06:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete fake micronation, not recognised by any country. See Hans Island for the real story behind the island in question, which is somewhat interesting. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 10:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect. Redirect to Hans Island (Tartupaluk already redirects there). Also, merge verifiable information (see sources provided in article) from this article to Hans Island. Also, add to list at micronation. This is a verifiable (if silly) attempt to create a micronation, and as such it can be recorded at Hans Island and micronation. Does not warrant its own article. Carcharoth 11:41, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment this is a classic case of an article that did not require a listing at AfD. I suggest the nominator reads WP:DEL#Problem_articles_where_deletion_may_not_be_needed. A simple bit of merging and redirecting would have worked fine. I would do this myself, but it is inappropriate to do so while the deletion debate is in progress. However, if the article is deleted, how can the information be retrieved to put at Hans Island? I would urge the closing admin to consider this. Carcharoth 11:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment Because some clown looking for cheap publicity does not belong in a serious encyclopedia? There are a lot of individuals who do silly things like this to get into the papers, almost none of which are notable, all of whom are forgotten five minutes after the reader gets a little chuckle at their expense. Resolute 16:09, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
You are focussing on the notability of the person, which is the wrong thing to focus on. I agree that the person is non-notable. The notable thing here is the history of Hans Island. Like it or not, this attempt to declare a micronation is part of the history of Hans Island, hence it should be noted at that article. I am not suggesting an article about the person, though if you want examples of people who generated media interest and have their own article, see Amos Urban Shirk and Simon Pulsifer. Carcharoth 17:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Comment to Carcharoth. Unfortunately it is not this simple. In fact redirect should never be used in such cases. If redirected two things happens, I indorse Hans island = Principality of Tartupaluk, which I absolutely don’t. But much more important wiki, the worlds largest encyclopedia, is now propagating that Hans island = Principality of Tartupaluk. That simply is wrong. You come to wiki because you are notable, wiki does not make you notable. Twthmoses 17:51, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree that redirects can be a problem if they imply the wrong thing. But I am not sure that this is consistently enforced. I can't think of a good example right now, but I am sure that similar cases in the past have been redirecte. Carcharoth 19:54, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Keep User Twthmoses has repeatedly removed all mention of the Principality of Tartupaluk from the "Recent events" section of the Hans Island page and attacked people who have objected. Just check the article's history. He/she seems to be of the OPINION that the Principality of Tartupaluk is a "satirical" exercise, but he/she doesn't seem to have any evidence to back this up. Unless he/she has some special knowledge not available from the primary sources, his/her arguments appear to be pure conjecture. Why is he/she now also pushing for this page's deletion? Its content is verifiable, appears to be neutral, and has appeared in several reputable news sources--not "obscure online outlets" as he/she claims. What's the rush to suppress it?

Ahh, User:Tartupaluk yet again as a “new user” whose first action just happened to concern this issue. Hehe. Never mind. I have neither removed nor attack anybody, and there is an entire history log for anybody to see if they wish. On the issue however, “Principality of Tartupaluk” is an un-notable fun “project”, the likes that 10.000 students make in the parents basement each year. 9999 of them never sees year two. That simple does not belong in “Recent events” on a serious article on a serious encyclopedia. It should not be necessary to explain why this is so. You inserted it; I catapulted it to the satire section, cause there is no other place for it on the Hans Island article. This is btw not the place to discuss this; it goes on the Hans Island page. Twthmoses 02:24, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to Hans Island. Silly or not, this is a verifiable part of the history of the place (and whether or not the guy's claim is silly and stupid is really not ours to decide, even though it is). No reason to have a whole article for it though. Seraphimblade 23:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to Hans Island. This is definitely part of the island's history, silly or not, and for a place the size and remoteness of Hans Island, probably one of the more interesting things to have ever happened to it, or, for that matter, ever will happen to it. Jamin 00:24, 14 October 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.