Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amelico


 * 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 as follows:

Premature closing due to Speedy Delete criteria G7 (author requests deletion). As this is information based on a fanfiction without verifiability (and no direct google hits outside of Wikipedia itself), and the author of the material discussed is demanding deltion, I believe this falls under speedy deletion easily. Moreover, the clear concensus is delete. &mdash; Deckill e r 06:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Amelico

 * See also .

'I have removed the text from this article, so no further damage can be done. I want the text to remain deleted. I understand that Wikipedia has certain policies about things like this. However, this is a different kind of situation. I want to protect the information in the article as much as possible.' Roygene 04:38, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

As with Xeaus, Amelico is a creation of my own for my book. My brother wrote this article for the sole purpose of being a royal pain in the butt. Roygene 19:46, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as fandom. &mdash; Deckill e r 22:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Why hasn't this page been deleted yet! I demand that it be deleted at once. Alot of the material posted in this article was created by myself for a book I am writing and should never have been posted in the first place. At the very least, an administrator should block Caliente001 from editing. Roygene 05:28, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. (Liberatore, 2006). 12:42, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete seems to be fan fiction. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  12:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The article purports to describe a fictional planet. It cites no sources at all and gives no clue as to the work of fiction involved.  I can find no sources, either.  There is nothing to prove that this article wasn't made up from whole cloth directly in Wikipedia.  Whether it is fan fiction or not is irrelevant.  The article is simply unverifiable. Delete. Uncle G 14:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Although I agree this should be deleted, I disagree that the article is in any way ambiguous as to its nature, it's clearly Star Wars related, and says so in the first sentence. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I realize that it appears to be Star Wars. He incorporated my ideas into an article to make it appear to be Star Wars. The book I am writing is totally unrelated to Star Wars. Roygene 15:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Note that it is less important, from the points of view of Wikipedia editors, how and why your brother came to write this article, and more important that the only way for readers to verify the contents of this article would be for them to burgle your house and sneak a peek at your unfinished manuscript. The reason to delete this article is that it is unverifiable, not that it may or may not be a misrepresentation.  After all, the fact that it is unverifiable encompasses the fact that the rest of us are unable to tell whether this article misrepresents a plot element of your book. Uncle G 15:43, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't say that its nature was ambiguous. I said that the article "gives no clue as to the work of fiction involved".  Remember that the Star Wars universe comprises a rather large number of works of fiction.  At the very least, an article on a planet in a fictional universe (especially one that has become a franchise) should give some indication of which works of fiction involve that planet.  Without even that, let alone cited secondary sources, the article is unverifiable, as I said. Uncle G 15:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, not WP:V as it is apparently fan fiction.--Isotope23 16:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, this is not a fanfiction site. Fails WP:V. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 22:11, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I feel like I'm like I'm trying to get the federal government to do something here. I requested that this article be deleted yesterday. I really couldn't care less what the techinical reasons are for deleting or not deleting this article, or why or why not it is unsuitable for Wikipedia. The fact of the matter is that most of the material in this article was created by myself for personal reasons and, regardless of all this techinical Wikipedia crap that you guys have been talking about, should be deleted for the express reason that my work is not yet copyrighted. I'm not comfortable with the prospect of this material being posted on a web encyclopedia where thousands of people can see it. Now, whatever strings have to be pulled, pull them. I want this article deleted, or at least the text of the article removed. Roygene 03:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Unfortunately, since you're not the author of the article, you can't request speedy deletion. Unless it violates a criterion for speedy deletion, it has to go through the five-day AfD discussion before it's deleted (or kept, though at this rate that probably won't happen). I've reverted your edit so others can see the material originally on the article. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 04:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete under G7(author requests deletion) As the nom's claimed brother (the original author) has gone and blanked it (or coaxed the password out of them, one of the two)  Failing speedy, this thing is fan cruft and there's only ~600 g-hits for it, of which there should be more for an actual star wars planet/system considering the fan base, which makes it an entirely fake article. Kevin_b_er 05:44, 30 June 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.