Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Principality of Wy (2nd nomination)


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) → B  music  ian  01:38, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Principality of Wy
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This is an article about a place; but, however many attempts are made to tell our readership about where this place (should it actually exist outside of the fevered imaginations of the creators of the article) may be are met with accusations of violation of wp:blp; So, simply, our readership must be allowed to know where this entity? is claimed to be, or the article MUST be consigned to the dirtbin of nonsense Crusoe8181 (talk) 10:48, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep/Huh? I see no reason why this article should be deleted. Please explain yourself. The article has a lot of references (although they're not very well formatted) and the previous AfD last year showed clear consensus to keep as notable. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:04, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Because it purports to be a place (even with a specified area) but on pain of excommunication we are not permitted to tell our readership where on our planet this purported place resideth; if we be permitted to inform our readership of the Principality's location, then let the article remain; if not then the article MUST go. I would imagine intelligent readers see the article as a rather miserable attempt at commercial, or spam, usage of Wikipedia but that is hardly relevant Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:31, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I assume this is a result of the page being updated to acknowledge the fact that the reference to a physical address cited on the Australian Trade Mark registry is no longer relevant: Australian Trade Mark link. The location of the principality is stated as being in the Sydney suburb of Mosman, and no references to an exact physical address seem to be currently readily available in a citable reference. The article has otherwise remained very much the same as it was when determined notable during the last proposal of deletion, so I can't imagine why it should be deleted now. Purpleorb (talk) 12:35, 16 May 2012 (UTC) — Purpleorb (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * So basically Crusoe8181 is upset because information he/she added to the page was removed, and now he/she wants to retaliate by nuking the page? That does not seem very good grounds for deletion. There is no requirement for Wikipedia to list the street address of every place that has an article. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:12, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 11:36, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Paul Delprat. Having a "micronation" is a fine hobby, but undeserving of space in an encyclopedia as a standalone article. If someone goes around doing silly things, and they get a splash of news coverage, it is more encyclopedic to cover them all in the article about the person. In the previous AFD even several of the Keep !votes and the closer called it silly and baloney. There are other encyclopedia-like websites for nonsense. Edison (talk) 20:10, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - This AfD is a waste of time. The article is propery sourced and meets criteria for notability.  From the discussion above, this appears to be an amplified, incorrect reaction to a relatively minor issue. Human.v2.0 (talk) 20:42, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - The topic passes WP:GNG, having received significant coverage in reliable sources:
 * Bloomberg Businessweek – Fed up with your country? Create your own
 * The Syndney Morning Herald – Urban prince poised for win over council
 * The China Post –  Australia hosts independent micronations
 * Short subsection within an article in The Syndney Morning Herald – You're kidding
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 00:19, 17 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep: I would like to note that Crusoe8181 also nominated this for deletion the last time, when it was also kept.  Unfortunately, Crusoe's nomination this time makes no reference to the prior AfD.  For this reason, Crusoe MUST be consigned to the dirtbin of nonsense.--Milowent • hasspoken  03:32, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep My own view is that this kind of garbage has no place in Wikipedia, and should be deleted. However, I recognise that this view is at odds with Wikipedia's policies and with widespread consensus among Wikipedians. It is well-sourced. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:30, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree entirely with James. The article does need a clean up though as it currently presents this as being an actual 'micronation' rather than the action of an eccentric. Australian householders can't secede from the rest of the country. Nick-D (talk) 10:42, 17 May 2012 (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.