Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karistan


 * 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 redirect to the respective works of origin, or delete where the work of origin does not have an article. – sgeureka t•c 11:43, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Karistan

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Prod contested by DGG. Non-notable fictional places. Articles were created by a user now identified as a sockpuppet. Matt (talk) 17:21, 22 March 2009 (UTC) 
 * Delete. If they are bad-faith edits by a sockpuppet, let's delete them. Looking at the articles themselves, I don't find any any of them are notable enough to pass our fiction guidelines. Looks like someone was assembling a list of fictional easter-European countries. (That list may be notable, but individual places on it would not be.) JRP (talk) 17:50, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect each to the fictional work they're from (assuming they're even real, of course, if not delete). Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  19:47, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect or merge which is what i suggested instead of outright deletion. I certainly agree they are not worth independent articles. DGG (talk) 01:50, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedily delete per G5 (ie creation by a banned user in violation of ban) or merge to the work they're from. Telephonedennis   talk  08:29, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * , since renamed to, is that very same user, it transpires. See Sockpuppet investigations/Fila3466757. Uncle G (talk) 01:28, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton  Talk  ·  Review  00:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Redirect. No need for an AFD. Pburka (talk) 01:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect - the subjects are lacking in real-world relevance or significance to justify inclusion, and certainly fail the general notability guideline. Valid search terms, though. – Toon (talk)  01:46, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect when it is possible to link to a series article or single work without killing links the subject might have with other works. (for example Herzoslovakia should redirect to a list of Agatha Christie works rather than one book in particular) - Mgm|(talk) 11:03, 27 March 2009 (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.