Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republic of Con's World

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. Mackensen (talk) 00:35, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Republic of Con's World
Actually i found this page quite funny so Add to BJAODN and Delete. It's a microplanet?? i guess... either way, had a good time reading it. Sasquatch&#08242;&#08596;Talk&#08596;Contributions 07:04, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * BJAODN indeed! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson 07:51, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as obvious misinformation. Mgm|(talk) 10:28, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: Now you know why they call it dope. I'd say it's fiction, but it reads more like an hallucination.  Maybe send it to BJAODN, but it's not so funny as it is laughable.  (Yes, I'm being harsh, and I apologize to the author if she or he is below the age of 18.) Geogre 15:15, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Fake and unfunny. ConeyCyclone 17:42, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I am the author, and I was not on any type of drug and was not writing the article to be funny or as a joke. I have taken out the information on the page and probably will not be returning to Wikipedia to write an article again. Note that there were several articles under the micronation category that said there were fantasy worlds, etc., so that is why I wrote it. Hopefully the Wikipedia administration is happy with getting rid of me as a writer and user of this website, because you have lost my support. unsigned comment by 
 * Comment: We have some articles on micronations, however, the presence of articles on micronations with no physical presence and no notoriety in the world at large is controversial at best. What's more, this didn't say it was a fantasy world; any article on a fictional topic needs to be up-front about it. An article that doesn't is indistinguishable from a hoax. I apologize that some of the voters here neglected to assume good faith and resorted to personal attacks.   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 22:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Yes, I would like to apologize for any apparent personal attack, although the attack on what was written is not something I back away from.  As written, it looks like a drug dream, as it says that there has been a history of constant warfare on a thing invented in 2001, that it is a planet that didn't exist until it was discovered, etc.  The logical impossibilities and outright absurdities in the article are unmistakeable.  I would recommend working very carefully on the text, regardless.  As for micronations on Wikipedia, I've been consistently against them, and the few that have survived have spurred extremely bitter (and long) debates.  They have generally only survived by giving reference to an exceptional number of "citizens" and real world recognition. Geogre 02:38, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I should also point out that blanking an article while it's on VfD is against Wikipedia rules.   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 22:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I should point out that "blanked by creator" is a speedy criterion, and typically that's what people do when they realize their submission was inappropriate and don't want any more fuss made over it. Edit summary was "From author: Deleted so it wouldn't cause any more problems!)", but no such luck LOL. Kappa 04:38, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - nn. --FCYTravis 22:28, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nonsense. JamesBurns 04:10, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong delete nonsense/hoax. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 00:42, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.  Please do not edit this page .