Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Kilaécŭs
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. Majorly (hot!) 21:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Kilaécŭs
- Non-notable, no other sources of info seem available, statements in the article unreferenced save by their own website apparently. MadMaxDog 03:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Speedy delete - I actually forgot to put it on. And by now, its almost empty anyway, except of a vague threat. MadMaxDog 13:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- You should know that not ALL entries within wikipedia are sourced by more than one website. Apparently not ALL of our FREE earth is as sourced as you:)Princess Elisabeth Vantar 03:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Some entries are not sourced at all. This is something to be changed, not used as an argument for your own case. You have not proven notability. If you'd like your article on Wikipedia, please provide sources like books, newspaper articles etc... as references. Ad hominem won't make a good case. MadMaxDog 06:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 11:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, no reliable source, and possible hoax. As far as I know, no Celtic language uses the character ŭ in its usual spelling. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Reeks of hoax. Even if it isn't, zero third-party sources - and not the first attempt to introduce non-verifiable communities into articles [1]. Tearlach 15:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Delete, PLEASE! If you all feel that it should be deleted, then do it. we do not NEED this page. It does NOT matter that you think that we are a hoax, because all that matters is that WE ARE NOT! We are everything that you have seen. We are no different than the other Gypsies. PLUS: We use the letter "Ŭ" becasue we wanted to. We are not a Celtic tribe, we are an AMERICAN GYPSY TRIBE, but we ARE NOT A HOAX. LOL! Now that's funny. Princess Elisabeth Vantar 15:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Elisabeth, we do not CLAIM you are a hoax. However, this is to be an Encyclopedia, and, partly because of complaints about Wikipedia's quality, we require references for our articles. It is YOUR responsibility to prove, by reliable sources, that your group is notable. I had articles deleted myself about stuff that I cared about, but could not reference properly. It smarts, but its necessary to demand references, for otherwise, this would end up just becoming a heap of "stuff" instead of an Encyclopedia. MadMaxDog 00:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, PLEASE! If you all feel that it should be deleted, then do it. we do not NEED this page. It does NOT matter that you think that we are a hoax, because all that matters is that WE ARE NOT! We are everything that you have seen. We are no different than the other Gypsies. PLUS: We use the letter "Ŭ" becasue we wanted to. We are not a Celtic tribe, we are an AMERICAN GYPSY TRIBE, but we ARE NOT A HOAX. LOL! Now that's funny. Princess Elisabeth Vantar 15:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Do gypsies have computers now?? Recury 18:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Actually we DO. Some Gypsies travel, and some only travel a few times a year. we are the later.Princess Elisabeth Vantar 19:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- We Gorgios have a similar concept; we call it "going on vacation". Tearlach 19:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy delete blatant hoax - iridescenti (talk to me!) 00:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as blatant hoax ("The Kilaécŭs Gypsy Family was founded on April 8th, 2007"—http://www.kilaecus.s5.com/). HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 07:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy DeleteNOT A HOAX! If you will delete the article please! If something causes this much absurdidy and blatant disrespect for a person or people, then I DO NOT want a part of it. Let this be known: I will make sure that EVERY person I know, and EVERY person they know and so forth, knows about the way that wikipedia has treated me and my tribe. God help/ forgive you, because I won't. I pitty the fact that you bully people like this. Wikipedia was nice, or AT LEAST I thought it was. I guess I was wrong.
-
- Eapos, editing another person's comments on a talk page to fit your views is a major taboo on Wikipedia. I realise that you are angry now and say you will not use (edit) Wikipedia anymore. But if you insist on such behaviour, this may well become fact in another way (ban). MadMaxDog 10:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- ALL I WANT TO HAVE MY ACCOUNT DELETED. CAN YOU GET MY ACCOUNT DELETED? I DON'T WANT ANYTHING *TO DO WITH WIKIPEDIA EVER AGAIN! I WANT MY ACCOUNT DELETED! I REPEATED MYSELF TO MAKESURE IT GOT THRE YOUR THICK SCULL. I CAN FIND EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN ON HERE...EXCEPT HOW TO DELETE MY ACCOUNT! TELL ME HOW PLEASE. Another thing: How long do these conspiracies stay on here? Does wikipedia store them forever?
- Unfortunately, you can't delete your account once you've made an edit (see WP:U#Deleting_your_account) but you can ask for your userpage to be blanked out and locked. - iridescenti (talk to me!) 12:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- In addition to iridiscenti's answer - this is, among other reasons, to prevent vandals from returning later with a 'clean slate'. This is not saying that YOU are a vandal - but it is part of the reason why there are normally no exceptions to this rule of accounts not being 'truly' deleted. MadMaxDog 12:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- As for 'these conspiracies' as you call them - they stay on here 'forever' (or at least for the forseeable future) exactly to make conspiracies impossible. If we had treated you unfairly, you could at any point appeal to administrators or to various other groups on Wikipedia tasked with this for a review what happened. At that point, this page will come in handy to recreate what happened. MadMaxDog 12:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- You know what? NO! This is the second time I have been mistreated like this, the other was not even my fault! I am done with wikipedia and its cheapskate "administrators" who use their "power" to bully others. I want nothing to do with it any longer! Princess Elisabeth Vantar 18:30, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- We are not suggesting you come back (you do not seem to wish to, so suit yourself) nor are we suggesting you contest this deletion (you would be exceedingly unlikely to succeed). We are just trying to be reasonable. MadMaxDog 00:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- FUCK YOU! YOU ASSWHOLE MOTHER FUCKER! I eat people like you for breakfast. Oh by the way...can you block me please? I would like to be banned. :) Have a wondrous day you piece of shit! Thank God that he firgives, or else you would be screwed...along wiht most over-zealous administrators on wikipedia. :] Princess Elisabeth Vantar 01:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- Oh sure, I totally agree with a block for you. You earned it, if for nothing else than again trying to tamper with talk pages. Also, a ban might actually make you stop coming back, as you insist you prefer not to. MadMaxDog 04:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- Hey, guys, please calm down. Let's concentrate on the article at hand, rather than spewing invective. No need to assume bad faith, either about this article or about each other. GracenotesT § 13:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- We are not suggesting you come back (you do not seem to wish to, so suit yourself) nor are we suggesting you contest this deletion (you would be exceedingly unlikely to succeed). We are just trying to be reasonable. MadMaxDog 00:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- You know what? NO! This is the second time I have been mistreated like this, the other was not even my fault! I am done with wikipedia and its cheapskate "administrators" who use their "power" to bully others. I want nothing to do with it any longer! Princess Elisabeth Vantar 18:30, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- As for 'these conspiracies' as you call them - they stay on here 'forever' (or at least for the forseeable future) exactly to make conspiracies impossible. If we had treated you unfairly, you could at any point appeal to administrators or to various other groups on Wikipedia tasked with this for a review what happened. At that point, this page will come in handy to recreate what happened. MadMaxDog 12:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- In addition to iridiscenti's answer - this is, among other reasons, to prevent vandals from returning later with a 'clean slate'. This is not saying that YOU are a vandal - but it is part of the reason why there are normally no exceptions to this rule of accounts not being 'truly' deleted. MadMaxDog 12:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, you can't delete your account once you've made an edit (see WP:U#Deleting_your_account) but you can ask for your userpage to be blanked out and locked. - iridescenti (talk to me!) 12:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- ALL I WANT TO HAVE MY ACCOUNT DELETED. CAN YOU GET MY ACCOUNT DELETED? I DON'T WANT ANYTHING *TO DO WITH WIKIPEDIA EVER AGAIN! I WANT MY ACCOUNT DELETED! I REPEATED MYSELF TO MAKESURE IT GOT THRE YOUR THICK SCULL. I CAN FIND EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN ON HERE...EXCEPT HOW TO DELETE MY ACCOUNT! TELL ME HOW PLEASE. Another thing: How long do these conspiracies stay on here? Does wikipedia store them forever?
- Eapos, editing another person's comments on a talk page to fit your views is a major taboo on Wikipedia. I realise that you are angry now and say you will not use (edit) Wikipedia anymore. But if you insist on such behaviour, this may well become fact in another way (ban). MadMaxDog 10:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - if one can't assume bad faith of someone whose last post is "FUCK YOU! YOU ASSWHOLE MOTHER FUCKER!", when can you? - iridescenti (talk to me!) 19:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- That's how escalation works, though. It's sort of a delicate COI case, methinks, but Eapos is frustrated by our cliches. Sometimes it is too late to assume good faith: such activity is more efficacious towards the beginning of disputes. GracenotesT § 20:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- Please look at my previous posts. I always tried to explain 'our' positions and that they weren't an attack on her or her family group, clan, whatever. And in fact, I was very much itching to give a much harsher comeback to her later comments. This person was unwilling to even entertain the idea of coming into a different community (Wikipedia) and then having to follow its rules. MadMaxDog 07:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- MadMazDog, there is all this talk about banning me and deleting my article, but so far its just talk. When is this supposedly going to happen? And by the way, that last comment was from my cousin, James. He HATES people who mistreat our family, especially me, we are as siblings. If I would have known what he was going to say on MY ACCOUNT, I woudl not have let him do such. Princess Elisabeth Vantar 16:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- Please look at my previous posts. I always tried to explain 'our' positions and that they weren't an attack on her or her family group, clan, whatever. And in fact, I was very much itching to give a much harsher comeback to her later comments. This person was unwilling to even entertain the idea of coming into a different community (Wikipedia) and then having to follow its rules. MadMaxDog 07:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- That's how escalation works, though. It's sort of a delicate COI case, methinks, but Eapos is frustrated by our cliches. Sometimes it is too late to assume good faith: such activity is more efficacious towards the beginning of disputes. GracenotesT § 20:38, 16 April 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.
