Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mixonyte

Mixonyte
Article about an unpublished fantasy book. Book most likely written by same person as article. ike9898 22:20, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Google search for mixonyte returns one hit.  The article is full of red links, and both of the blue links point to irrelevant articles (in one case, the plural "Gens" links to an article about the singular Gens).  Also the anon that created this removed the VfD notice, and made this edit a couple of days ago. Dave6 22:44, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's a sly ad... in this instance for an unpublished fantasy book. Wyss 00:24, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Buy my book! Buy my book! Buy my book! (Advertising/fiction/advertising fiction.)  Geogre 00:56, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sheer self-boosterism. Katefan0 01:07, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, advertisement, probably vanity. I'd really like to see a strong and simply "no-futures" policy about books/movies/games/software that is just about to be released. Even if arguably notable, I think it should be policy to delete these because a) Wikipedia is not a news medium and there should be no rush to include things; b) waiting for release does very little harm, while allowing Wikipedia to be used as a publicity medium does a good deal of harm; a "no-futures" rule is simple to understand and uncontroversial to apply, whereas "really notable futures" is subject to endless debate. It is similar to the "no-autobiography" rule: we do not allow autobiography no matter how notable the autobiographer. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 02:26, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: I entirely agree with you there and always vote delete on future releases, no matter what they are.  The rumors of a product, whether artistic or material, are never verifiable.  To say that it is anticipated is not content.  To say that it is expected is not content.  To say more than that it is expected and anticipated is unverifiable, and this is true of upcoming Parliamentary elections, upcoming games, movies, etc.  Also, upcoming anything attracts fan writing.  It's just easier and saner to wait for the thing to exist. Geogre 04:37, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep Have you all hearts of stone? Can you not see that this young author is reaching out to the wikipedia community? What makes you think that they want advertisement? Could it be because, within you unstable minds, such a thing would fall under the guidelines of your motives? I say give Mixonyte a chance, and watch to see if it turns to anything better. Because seriously; judging from the brutish and uncivilized way in which you all have attacked this article, do you truly want to turn away ALL of you potential visitors? Thsi is simple a suggestion (and do forgive me if I semed to have added my response in the wrong way; this portion of Wikipedia's navigation is quite secretive.)
 * Better to have a heart of stone and an encyclopedia than a head of stone and an advertising space. It's pretty simple:  if it's advertising, we don't accept it.  We don't accept advertising in banner ads for pay, and we surely don't allow unpaid advertising disguised as an article.  Given the blitheness with which the author of the article has produced false accounts and vandalized voting, I'm not in any way worried about hurting the author's feelings.  Find another medium to drum up business.  Geogre 01:21, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Please do not attack Geogre, thats just his personality. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 17:24, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * What could possibly be less secretive than a link from the explanatory notice within the article itself? Deletion debates are supposed to be public and open. If you had a problem "navigating" please let us know what it was so that we can improve the VfD notice format. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 18:11, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable advertisement for a non-existent product. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 17:24, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep I think this article has alot of potential. I personally agree with what the man above wrote about you all having hearts of stone. Get your heads out of your asses; excuse my use of term, but I truly think you all should lighten up, especially George. As for you, Grider, I've just throne a bone. Go feth it.
 * Keep, I've actually heard of the Bobble de Mixonyte series of comic books which were also about a clone named Bobble. I think this should be kepts, because many young readers enjoy the series of comics. I agree that the masses of you should lighten up, please.
 * User:Brogarthsmith, please sign your votes by typing ~ after your comment. Also, each person only gets one vote.  This is your third Keep vote. Dave6 18:05, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Also, **User:Brogarthsmith's first edit is to this page. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 18:11, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not a notable book. I feel kind of bad, because it would be great to encourage authors, but still, it doesn't belong on wikipedia. --Improv 22:22, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Anything that so many anonymous sock-puppets want to keep has just got to go! P Ingerson 23:18, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete this. &mdash;[[en:RaD Man|RaD Man (talk)]] 23:06, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete as bovine excrement. There's also call to ban this IP.  Wouldn't break my heart. - Lucky 6.9 23:12, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ad. And the author is not helping his case. And keep an eye on the "Useful Terms" list (boy, were they ever useful!) to make sure no other articles on this thing sneak in. -R. fiend 03:19, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Del.Mikkalai 08:36, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep 155.91.19.73 02:29, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC) cool idea.  don't dis the little guy