Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zegovia

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 moot since already deleted by an administrator. Ifnord 02:12, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zegovia

I deleted this article as it had already been nominated for deletion by someone several days ago in the new informal way, but it was recreated by the author. It is a fictional country in eastern Europe, but the author has not published the book File Éireann 22:51, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages because they arise directly from the Zegovia article and if it is deleted they also must go:

• Yoannhes III
• Yoannhes VII
• Royal Federated Republic of Zegovia
• Holy Catholic Kingdom of Zegovia
• Vluzjâbn
• Govara
• Antesecobean Highlands
• Ilta bon Kregor
• Zegov
• Kuneš

--File Éireann 23:15, 21 February 2006 (UTC)--File Éireann 23:28, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

And I am nominating the associated article

• Zegovian

regarding the fictional language of the above. I laced a {{prod}} tag on that and requested the author to explain what he was doing with no success; the tag was removed with no explanation Tonywalton  | Talk 23:38, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete all, per nom. Fake country made up by some guy, who also wrote the article (see user name of creator). Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as nn. We do have Tatooine but Star Wars has proven notability. Monkeyman^(talk) 23:27, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all as nn. mikka (t) 23:34, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, delete, delete. Who has ever heard of David Hunt, or his constructed language anyway?? ric 23:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Totally fictional and non-notable THB 00:20, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I'm the one who prodded half of those articles. As I recall from the original version of the parent article, this is not only unpublished, the book is unfinished. NickelShoe 00:22, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all per nom. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 10:37, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. TheRingess 14:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• DO NOT DELETE I realize that this topic is under debate and fictional, but Zegovia is relevant. The language for the country has been created and is used in its place names. If anything else is required to prove its validity please contact me. The country was created solely for the purpose of creating the language, the books were a side-thought and no longer planned at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwhunt (talk • contribs)
  • I'm not sure what you mean. How is it relevant? Respectfully, it's made-up and unheard of. Have you read What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Verifiability? This isn't an appropriate topic for an encyclopedia. (Much appreciate you putting in your 2 cents, though. Also remember to sign your posts in discussions with ~~~~. NickelShoe 02:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Sindarin and Quenya have articles on here but their "relevance" is not due to the fact of their being constructed languages in itself; they have a "relevance" (which is what I assume you mean when notability is discussed) due to the works in which they appear. Wikipedia is not a medium for disseminating neologisms (however well-constructed); it documents what already exists and is of note. Tonywalton  | Talk 23:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• delete. I can't decide whether it's "original research," "not notable," or "nonsense." I do feel for the author. Is there a place within wikimedia where stuff such as this belongs? ... aa:talk 02:08, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. I do not feel for the author, and no, there is nowhere in Wikipedia for it. Perhaps he could look into Wikicities. --Golbez 02:10, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Please note I said Wikimedia, not Wikipedia. If we have place for vespene gas, I am sure the foundation has somewhere for material such as this. Disk space is cheap. If we can keep the author on board and happy somewhere, I can think of at least a few places they could be useful. ... aa:talk 05:53, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I did note that after I posted it, but it did not alter my comment. We have a place for vespene gas because it's an aspect of a major published work. This work is neither major nor published. I can think of nowhere in Wikimedia where such a thing can be, at least until it becomes major and published. --Golbez 19:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Nothing personal against the creator of these things, but it's established Wikipedia policy that this site is not a place to put stuff you just made up yourself. Things that exist in the real world are fine, as well as things from notable fiction, but not things you invented and haven't yet published; that's known as original research. If your invented country, and its language and other fictional aspects, ultimately get used in a published work of sufficient notability (book, movie, TV show, computer game, trading-card series, ...), then it would be a suitable topic here. *Dan T.* 02:56, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all as unverifiable, non-notable, micronations, etc., etc. Stifle 11:34, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Oh, and original research too. Stifle 11:35, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• I have to say that I'd like to see more of the language and the setting. But 0 relevant Google hits? Delete. On the other hand, there is indeed another please on Wikimedia, namely the Conlang Wiki at Wikicities. Please consider moving all this stuff there. —IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 00:55, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all per nom. --Fire Star 07:18, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Wipe them out. All of them. DenisMoskowitz 14:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
• No google hits, no Langmaker entry, no appearance on Janko Gorenc's list, delete. Wiwaxia 06:42, 25 February 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.