Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melano Supriatna


 * 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 wasclosed as possible hoax. I am not opposed to re-creation should sources be found. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 12:53, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Melano Supriatna
The article seems to be hoax or a bad conflict of interest. It was originally a redirect to the user page of a problem user User:Haggawaga - Oegawagga created by the user himself. Later it was developed into the article. No google hits outside wikipedia and its clones. The paper references exist but appear dubious. In the image the author claimed to be a sailorman who shoot the image himself? User:Haggawaga - Oegawagga was a subject of a recent sock puppeting investigation and appear to be a college student - not an old sailor or a dead Indonesian revolutionary Alex Bakharev 22:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Support - There is no mention of anyone with this name within one of the claimed references. No specific place of birth, and usually javanese of this era were always quite strongly identified with their place of birth SatuSuro 23:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Reading the response of one of the editors who claimed in one minute to be an expert on this alleged hero and then the next denying authorship (within the space of a few minutes) I would be most concerned that to keep what is from my knowledge of Java of the era tantamount to saying  we are not sure lets keep the hoax - most doubtful articles like this have been deleted on the spot. Javanese of this era - with their usual regional and home town allegiances would never be vague about place of birth - there is no appear genuine about a book that has a meticulous index and also a biographical list with nobody the slightest similarity in name actually there. The slippage of usage of the name by the editor in question is not a usual derivative used by javanese of the era either - I would consider that NPOV is totally irrelevent in the case of an article which makes a mockery of the Indonesian Project - to allow temporary keep of an article around a fictitious project of an editor is problematic. There is either date of birth, place of birth, specific reference with name in a published item - or its out as soon as possible. And to throw in Andersons or Cribbs book as a decoy is tantamount to ... well I leave it up to others SatuSuro 23:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Tentative Keep - If the claims are verified then keep and fix for NPOV. The references cited appear genuine but hard to confirm. It would be best if the editor involved provided further material for verification. I'm not sure about the nominator's claims, I'll assume good faith in this case. --Javit 23:35, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - The main contributor's comments at User_talk:Haggawaga_-_Oegawagga are very worrying indeed. I'm having second thoughts on my assumption of good faith --Javit 23:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 *  Verify References - but most likely a hoax  Delete - apparent hoax- needs to be confirmed by checking the supplied references. I have read both books listed under ‘References’ but these were library borrowed and now not handy. But this was late last year and I don't remember this character. The books themselves can be considered authoritative sources on the Indonesian revolution period, so if this character is not in them, then it should be scrubbed.
 * THe article history suggests a hoax, the main contributor is being very evasive on how he developed the article. Such hoaxes are very damaging to wikipedia and should be dealt with very strictly.--Merbabu 23:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Further comment - I've borrowed the Cribb reference from the library - as I expected, not a mention. SatuSuro has already given good reasons why he thinks the anderson reference is also false. Plus, check user suggests all contributors are the one person and this likely sockpuppetry case has been issue recently. Thus, should be removed and editor's other articles examined for truthfulness. Such hoaxes bring wikipedia into disrepute. Merbabu 11:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Suggestion if this does turn out to be a hoax (not something I can easily determine) other articles created by this user should be checked as he has written several historical article of a similar nature. --Daniel J. Leivick 23:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Strongly support Suggestion - SatuSuro 23:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. --Javit 23:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment I will possibly be prepared to AGF if page numbers are presented, and a quotation included. But it is highly unlike that academic books of the types cited would provide the biographical  details in the article, so I would want a specific source for them, or a quote from one of the books providing the information. DGG 02:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Andersons - Biographical Appendix pp.411-458 has no mention - all of the 135+ persons mentioned in that appendix have birth place and date (although about 4 have contradictory birth dats and annotated info about that) - I can assure you that there are some particularly obscure characters mentioned. Also in my slow plodding through Javanese names for a number of different off-wikipedia projects I have never found a javanese with the name melano (or melana) SatuSuro 03:59, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete salt and block the socks as a hoax, SatuSuro's comment above are compelling. The editors of the article now need to support the article with WP:V and WP:RS sources. Gnangarra 08:08, 8 June 2007 (UTC). update by Gnangarra 01:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - there is and was no such person. regardless of editors comments- neither the cribb or anderson books support such a person in Indonesian history SatuSuro 11:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - I have no reason to assume bad faith from this editor. He has written articles before that were questioned and deleted as hoaxes when in fact there were reliable sources to substantiate the articles.  See Hendrick Jacobszoon Lucifer.  Jsut because we have not heard of him does not mean he exists.  I think tagging for references is the most appropriate action. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 12:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh come on, we have between us in front of us, at least five of the most reliable scholarly books on this 45-50 period that mention dozens, even hundreds of people - not one mentions this character - and we've shown that the editor has falsely added such references. Furthermore, the whole article smells of hoax; overly general, weird name and nonsensical interpretation of his name ('lucky'). The editor first claims he is an expert on the topic, then within minutes, says that he can't remember if it is even accurate. Reliable sources or delete. As for this apparent hoax Ocking Jayat Mayaj from the same bunch of editors who, according to check user, are one. The whole Jakarta harbour thing stinks of hoax. I wrote Indonesian National Revolution and i all the sources, there wasn't a mention. Wikipedia is not based on vague memories of a sailor in a bar in the 1960s (which is what the editor is claiming), but based on WP:RS. Merbabu 12:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I will be the first person to agree that WP:RS are the cornerstone to th is project. Before I write any article myself is tart with my sources.  I am doing some research now to see what I can find. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 12:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * THere's a number of references here Indonesian National Revolution. kind regards Merbabu 13:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Whether good or bad faith - there is an obvious thrill in being able to create an article about somebody who never existed - and to continue to work on it uninterrupted for so long - there could be a few in the wikipedia pantheon who havent been weeded out yet. A small problem is that articles about lesser persons have seen AFd and speedy deletes at the hand of enthusiasts - under the banner of WP:N Notability, and WP:V verifiablity and in most cases good sense - to hold onto this one when there is no mention in the two references - and for a highly unlikely followup that would clear the hurdle of WP:N and WP:V  at this stage - I would say patient good humoured waiting for the editor in question to respond is probably sufficiently good faith - rather than actually nominating to keep or delete the article, I am wondering with anticipation what he might say this time SatuSuro 12:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes SS, Chris' offer to provide further verification either way will help. Let's give it a few more days for O-W to find his sources. Merbabu 13:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I've redirected it to Indonesian National Revolution; it was just one of the many rebels from that era. I think, perhaps their a small section can be added about him (really small), and the rest merged. So not deleing, just redirecting it. And than, I think the issue is sttled for now; the article isn't fit for wikipedia. The man might have been just legend, and I might have accidently made a mistake between several dfferent people. Sorry, my fault. Is that a satishfieng solution? -)-(-H- (&#124;-&#124;) -O-)-(- 16:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Response - I'm sorry I'm not happy with that redirect at all, I've listed it as speedy deletion under WP:CSD. From your comments above I gather you withdraw your position on the notability and verifiability of the subject matter. Therefore, it must go rather than redirect. Please feel free to recreate when you have verifiable sources and can share them with the community --Javit 17:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment i have reverted the redirect as an innapropriate redirect. I would prefer this afd run its course. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:52, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Further comment - the Indonesian National Revolution topic is so broad with so many characters and events of verifiable notability that have not been mentioned due to space in that article, and limitations in time to create other articles. Thus, why should we include a small passage from this Melano case? At best he is of no verified notability at all (only claimed memories of a 1960s conversation) - at worst it is a hoax of sockpuppeting vandals. What a joke such a new section would make of wikipedia. Merbabu 01:02, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This Sockpuppet of User:Mrlob -- User:Zabuzza claims to be Melano Supriatna, not only is this a bad faith edit it appears to be a common claim of sockpuppets Mrlob User:Murlock dif given that User:Haggawaga - Oegawagga has gone to a lot effort to write this article, adding false sources then say "its not fit for wikipedia" just redirect it is sufficient in my eye to remove the assumption of good faith extend in the recent checkuser as well. Gnangarra 00:12, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment it is disturbing that the major editor should claim that the article should remain when no WP:V or WP:N has been forthcoming. Too much patience and good faith is being allowed on a fruadulent hoax article. What a waste of time. SatuSuro 10:54, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Rename I got some news for you, this man did exist but was called Supriata and not Melano Supriatna. The Honorable Kermanshahi 12:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - WP:RS, WP:V and WP:N ???? SatuSuro 12:26, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment google search for Supriata -"wikipedia" returns 23 hits only 3 arent about Jan Supriata-- marketing support manager for "Sugi Samapersada Tbk PT SUGI.JK (Jakarta)" from 1995 to 2002, 2 are about a Yousef Supriata -- of Bapedalda, the central environment department responding to concerns about industrial waste. the other is mirror here.  Gnangarra 12:41, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - yes, i agree. It is up to Kermanshahi to provide some verification. It's interesting that this group of editors are the only ones who know about him (and at least 1 other apparent hoax). Merbabu 12:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. user:Zabuzza said he was called Melano Supriatna and that this shouldn't be confused with a famous general named Supriata, thats why I thought he might be called Supriatna. I looked on google as well and I couldn't find anything either so I support the deletion as well. The Honorable Kermanshahi 17:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment please decide which of opinion you want to stand an strike the others, what are you referring any way to this article is about Melano Supriatna an apparent freedom fighter, not some unknown general called Supriata. Gnangarra 01:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - I think, the redirection should be best. Not simply deleting this one; I've got to much work and contributions in the articl eto have it just deleted like this; redirect it, as I allready suggested, to Indonesian National Revolution. Don't merge it, but redirect it. Okay? I don't see any reason in just deleting this one. It's to easy. Deleting it would make it impossible to improve it when better sources are found; I than would be forced to recreate the whole thing. For god's sake; redirectb this one. -)-(-H- (&#124;-&#124;) -O-)-(- 19:06, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - better sources aren't going to be found. In fact, your use of 'better' sources is misleading as no sources have been found yet (hence the belief that this is hoax). Merbabu 02:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete (Caniago 21:21, 10 June 2007 (UTC))
 * 'Comment - its unbeleivable in view of WP:V and WP:N that this has not been closed and the article removed. That a group of editors (or the one perhaps) can ask for a redirect of a clear hoax goes against what WP:Not implies. SatuSuro 02:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


 * By the way: I've also nominated Ocking Jayat Mayaj for deletion. Same 'group' of editors, identical false references provided (now removed). Merbabu 03:38, 11 June 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.