Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Govi Supremacy Myth


 * 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. – Steel 15:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Govi Supremacy Myth

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The entire article is original research by a single Wikipedia editor. No references are given in the article. It is also a POV fork of the article Govigama. snowolfD4( talk / @ ) 04:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:OR and WP:V. -- K.Z       Talk  •   Vandal   •  Contrib  07:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Original research and a POV fork. -- Chairman S. Talk  Contribs  09:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Nomen Nescio Gnothi seauton 20:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Do not Delete I am surprised that User:Snowolfd4 who is obviously very  keen to delete this page says that it is original research and states .lack of references as the main reason for deletion. However, the page has 13 references and it also refers to a Sri Lankan Supreme court case (the case number is also provided) and also quotes a Human Rights Commision application. Need even more references ?
 * The other purported reason for deletion is that it is created only by one Wikipedia editor ! Is that a valid reason for deletion ?
 * The third reason is that it is a fork. Yes it is a fork but the information on this page is too voluminous to fit into the main article. Hence the fork.
 * Caste is a sensitive topic in Sri Lanka and it is also a propaganda topic used by Sri Lankan governments as shown on this page. User:Snowolfd4’s keenness to delete this page appears to be an attempt to suppress information that is unpalatable to him . The following record of previous attacks on this page will show that it is malicious and not a genuine exercise to properly implement Wikipedia policies.
 * On 14 January User:Snowolfd4 tagged the same page as a Hoax saying there were no references.  On 24 January User:Lahiru k who appears to be a sockpuppet  of User:Snowolfd4 added back  the same malicious tags  again without giving any reasons on the talk page or anywhere else. Now User:Snowolfd4 is attempting to delete the page from Wikipedia.
 * This page should not be deleted. Wikramadithya 20:49, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Wikramadithya, please understand I have nothing against you personally. My problem with this article, and, to be honest with you're edits as a whole, is that they appear to be you personal opinion and not the general consensus. Considering that you fail to provide any sources for what you have written here, and for things like you're blatant attacks / defamation against D.S. Senanayake, and the fact that no one else seems to agree with what you're writing, I'm pretty sure they are all you're personal opinions.
 * Please understand that Wikipedia is not a place to publish you're personal opinions. Everything we write here has to be verifiable and accurate, so I don't think this article should remain on Wikipedia.
 * Also, if you suspect sock puppetry, please feel free to report me (or anyone else for that matter) at WP:SSP or WP:RCU to confirm it.
 * Thanks, and I'd appreciate if we discuss the content of the article only and not personally attack other users.--snowolfD4( <b style="color:#339966; font-family:Constantia;">talk</b> / <b style="color:#CC0099; font-family:Constantia;">@</b> ) 02:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I hate it when people accuse me for sockpuppeteering or as a sockpuppet itself. If you still accuse me on that, go ahead and put a checkuser case on me. According to WP:SOCK if I really am sockpuppet, I've vilolated that policy since I voted here. If you have no idea how to put a check user, feel free to ask me on how to. -- ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪   walkie-talkie  06:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as unsourced. The "references" are claimed to be the Sri Lanka Government's attempts to promote the myth; thus they can't serve as sources for it being a myth (with the possible exception of the Supreme Court case). Unless someone has written about the Sri Lankan Government's attempts at faking history, they're not notable. --Huon 22:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * DELETE Not only the article is a WP:OR even the answer given here by its creator is flawed(which made me to vote)..This article is used to make personal attacks on several prominent Sinhalese leaders with totally baseless accusations. Having seeing the way he had attacked fellow wikipedians(calling them sock puppets) ,I don't think we have to go that far to realize that someone is trying to settle a score here..OR using wikipedia to express his personal vendetta..Finally ,caste system is definitely not a sensitive case among Sinhalese, most of them frankly don't care it, and it was never an issue in elections either..thanks --Iwazaki 00:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 *  Delete  Keep OR, but the overuse of templates on the page appear outright malicious. Edited to add: After closer scrutiny, I think something is amiss here with this nom. The article needs proper wikification and MOS sourcing, but I think this is verifiable. - WeniWidiWiki 05:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Might I inquire where you get your opinion from and if you have any sources to back it up?
 * And I assure you no malice involved in the tags. I believe all the tag were accurate. It is WP:OR, it didn't cite a single source, it wasn't written in an neutral manner and the accuracy of the article is highly disputable.--<b style="color:#9696A0; font-family:Tahoma;">snowolf</b><b style="color:#0A0096; font-family:tahoma;">D4</b>( <b style="color:#339966; font-family:Constantia;">talk</b> / <b style="color:#CC0099; font-family:Constantia;">@</b> ) 02:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * This page should not be deleted.


 * The page under discussion is not ‘original research’. The page is based primarily on the submissions to the Supreme Court and the Human Rights Commission respectively in the case and application cited on the page. Further, all information on the page has been previously published many times in Sri Lankan research studies and in Sri Lankan national newspapers: the Daily News, Sunday Observer, Island, Sunday Leader and Ravaya.


 * Normally if a Wikipedia user has a contrary viewpoint, one would expect that user to edit the page and include their contrary viewpoint too on the page. However, campaigning to delete a page without editing the page suggests an intention to maliciously suppress the information in totality.


 * It’s admirable how several people have rallied, and within a few hours too, to support User:Snowolfd4. One of them is even voting for the deletion of the page based not on what the page says but on what I have said here! However, although this is a Sri Lankan topic, it is not another numbers game where a majority can bulldoze minorities. Therefore diplomatic protocol aside, it would be public money well spent if this interest group could clearly note their contrary viewpoints on the page rather than coming down with a barrage of attacks on the Editor.


 * It may also be of relief to the interest group if they note that the thorny issue of ‘government propaganda’ on the page doesn’t refer to their present government of Sri Lanka.


 * Wikramadithya 23:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Another vote and another bunch of personal insults..You seemed to expanding your personal vendetta from Sinhalese to rest of the wikipedians..Plus,again there are several flaws in you reply,let me address one of them..I voted not only because of your reply,but your comments here certainly made my vote come faster than expected..Even though your work is 100% WP:OR(there is no question about it) i was expecting you to defend it in a proper way..But having seeing the way you insulted fellow editors coupled with whole bunch of OR in the article and not to forget the insults you have directed at the notable Sinhalese, led me to vote immediately.. hope this will clear up things.--Iwazaki 10:22, 23 February 2007 (UTC)02:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete: per nom and Iwazaki. -- ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪  walkie-talkie  06:11, 23 February 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.