Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erdosville


 * 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. --Core des at 07:48, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Erdosville
This place does not exist at all. It was created as part of an experiment in the ability of Wikipedia to "self-heal". The experiment is now concluded as in over a year Wikipedia was unable to detect and remove the existance of a notable but non-existant place. ErdosvillePhil 20:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete And in the future, there are far better ways than AFD to delete these sorts of experiments. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 20:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Fails Google search. - CobaltBlueTony 20:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and suggest creator/nominator read Borges Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius... if they've not already done so. On a side note, this really hits home why unreferenced articles should be agressively tagged for sourcing and deleted if sourcing isn't provided in short order.--Isotope23 20:36, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Yay! You get a gold star on your forehead!  There's the door.  Buh bye now! - Richfife 22:22, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, whether Phil is telling the truth or not, it's unsourced. Gazpacho 01:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, plus comment to the nominator: Wikimedia software tracks the hits to an article (I know, because I administrate a Wikimedia wiki of my own). An interesting experiment would be to look and see if anyone ever actually went and looked at this article, especially as there are no mainspace pages that link to it. I suspect that all this "experiment" proves is that people who make bad faith edits are a colossal waste of everyone's time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CheNuevara (talk • contribs)
 * Comment Between the time it was created and the time it was nominated for deletion, no fewer than 8 people edited it, so at least 8 people went and looked at it. Incidentally, a google search turned up a lot of Wikipedia mirrors which have copied the content.  ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 19:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment We have actually found several real estate agencies in that area who said they could sell us a house in the town, having gleaned information from Wikipedia on it. ErdosvillePhil 20:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment You've got to be kidding about the real estate agents. They tell people they can sell them houses when they don't actually have listings? ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 20:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Our understanding is that the location was added as an area with listings available. ErdosvillePhil 22:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Eight people in one year? That's less than a pittance. Besides, ignoring the original creator and the AfD, there's an anonymous IP (who probably is or knows the OP, in all likelihood), plus a bot, a spelling fix, AWB, and one person who made an actual contribution to the article (who has roughly 35 mainspace edits). Eight editors in one year? Twently edits in a year? This article didn't go unfixed, it went unnoticed. - Che Nuevara  06:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment: Maybe people shouldn't slam this guy before he publishes his results. If Wikipedia has problems that editors aren't already aware of, it doesn't help to shoot the messenger. However, it would have been nice if he had told Jimbo what he was doing. Gazpacho 01:17, 21 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.