Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The International Network for Inclusive Democracy


 * 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 of the debate was Delete karmafist 21:17, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

The International Network for Inclusive Democracy
Non-notable, gets 9 unique Google hits (two of which are from WP). A related article was AfD'ed recently in a sockpuppet-ridden nomination, and the creator(s) of this article insist that Wikipedia has a political agenda against him/them. They also kept putting up a copyright violation at Inclusive Democracy, which has now been protected against recreation. - ulayiti (talk)  14:10, 28 December 2005 (UTC) title="User talk:Freakofnurture">TALK ] )  15:41, Dec. 28, 2005
 * Delete. Assertion of notability is not the same as notability; the group itself could be easily speedied since it has had ample time to provide references and it hasn't. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 14:41, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable, per nomination and without political bias of any sort, thank you. &mdash; F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  15:44, Dec. 28, 2005
 * Comment: Actually, this could be speedied under the new wording of A7:  'An article about a [...] group of people [...] that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject.'  I'm not going to do that now though, mainly because I can't be bothered and it's going to be deleted anyway. - ulayiti (talk)  16:11, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as it would be a terrible shame to spoil the author's conspiracy theory by failing to delete such obvious twaddle. Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 18:31, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment Yesterday you put a notice asking us to do some cleaning up in the Network page —no warning at all up to then!-and we immediately responded with some cleaning up, to find today an AfD supported by the well known duo of the Liberal Democrat and the anarcho-CAPITALIST who seem determined to delete any trace of the Inclusive Democracy project from their “Encyclopedia”, because they are afraid of new concepts. And of course they were immediately supported by other administradroids who are much more interested in such important topics as the World of Darkness, creationism and retaining the status-quo than in a new Network promoting a new social project. Wikipedia is all yours folks! We do not care about you because you confirmed all the accusations being published at the moment in the world press about the bias and unreliability of this joke Encyclopedia, and we will help as much as we can to help all those who do not know what is going on here about how entries are selected and de-selected and the ‘expertise’ of so-called administradroids who in the last instance decide what should appear here and what not! The field is in your favor and you call your rubberstamp gang, when the game gets too tough, to power play with the illusion of neutrality and objectivity. Wikipedia is a failure in progress. I guess you have no priority to trace the IP of the pornographer, which really shows where your heads are.User:john sargis 23:59, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * OMG like I'm so afraid as an 'administradroid' of any new concepts that might accidentally enter my field of vision, and that's why I advocate deleting most of the content of Wikipedia, including articles such as Quantum mechanics which I don't understand anyway. Or would it perhaps have something to do with the fact that nobody cares about your little 'network'. It gets nine Google hits, for Pete's sake! My user name, for example, gets 38,600. That's what, over four thousand times more than that, and I still don't have an article about myself here. So can you please get a clue of what Wikipedia is about, and stop making personal attacks on my userpage. That's called vandalism. - ulayiti (talk)  07:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


 * REGRESSION IN WIKIPEDIA

--TheVel 13:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Alas! Nowadays, the validity of an entry or a network depends on "google hits" and popularity. I'm sure that the enlightment's encyclopaedists were determining their entries on the basis of popularity (for example the entry "ratio" would do zillion hits back then)! Do you know all you "sarcastic Mr know it all", how many google hits you will find about McDonald's or Madonna; Ofcourse, this thing proves that they are more important... Adorno would commit suicide after a small "tour" in here...--TheVel 10:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * More importantly, it proves that a wikipedia editor adding information about McDonald's or Madonna can cite non-propogandist sources. &mdash; F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  11:54, Dec. 29, 2005 SHIT
 * More regression: network's entry is depended on people who identify the promotion of democratic values with propaganda. What to say... And enough with naivety: citing Madonna and McDonald's means propagandizing capitalist values... THERE IS NO NEUTRAL POINT OF VIEW!


 * Comment. If notability for Wikipedia is measured by Google hits then this could well explain the low quality information it provides for which it is justifiably criticised by the world press. You should better however concentrate on such items like the bios of Hollywood stars and football players (or the other important items mentioned by another user above) and forget everything else! This would surely expand enormously the number of Google hits you get. As regards vandalism, I wonder why comments by an administrator above that “the group is unknown to anybody outside its own membership” do not cosntitute vandalism of the worst kind, apart from revealing the political bias of an anarcho-capitalist (i.e. someone who wishes to restrict the powers of the state in order to leave the market--namely the law of the jungle-- completely free to destroy all the weak in this world. How he is so sure of this—unless of course he asked the likes of the people he frequently meets in Hilton, Sheraton and the like! 10.55: Dec. 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * No. Vandalism of the worst kind might include saying "Mr. Fotopolis was involved in the Kennedy assassination" when there is no evidence to support the claim. If you see no difference between those two statements, you might be unable to objectively contribute to this discussion. Also, you might consider not making attacks based on the content of my user page (which has existed, without complaint, for a greater period of time than the article being discussed). Will your next one be "Freakofnurture has lost 2 of 3 chess games"? &mdash; F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  11:54, Dec. 29, 2005


 * Google hits are a good way of determining notability in some cases. If something only gets nine Google hits, has no relevant literature and has not been mentioned in any media, then I think it's quite safe to assume that it's not notable enough to be included in an encyclopaedia. Saying something isn't notable is not vandalism, it's just stating a claim (which may be right or wrong). - ulayiti (talk)  15:08, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * 'Your double standards are obvious and seems you are proud of them! Socialist Workers' Party (Greece) has four Google hits, has no relevant literature and has not been mentioned in any media. It's therefore quite safe, according to your dubious logic, to assume that it's not notable enough to be included in an encyclopaedia.Yet, it has a separate Wiki entry!; 16:50,30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * If this is true, I'd vote to either delete it or have it merged into a more significant article. &mdash; F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  17:08, Dec. 30, 2005
 * OK, you can easily check. But this was just one example. Do you think this is the only one???21:25, Dec. 30, 2005
 *  "socialist workers' party" greece gets 39,200 Google hits . I'm pretty sure there's some literature about it (though it's probably gonna be mostly in Greek, so I can't check that), and it publishes a newspaper and a magazine. Those might mention the party every once in a while, don't you think? Oh, and vandalising this page is not going to help you at all. - ulayiti (talk)  00:46, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Unless you are joking (which I doubt) YOU ARE LYING. You simply counted the Google hints to the Socialist Worker Party in general which has branches all over Europe and beyond while we were talking specifically about the Greek branch of it, which has a separate Wiki entry! And as regards the silly argument on publications that the Greek branch "publishes a newspaper and a magazine'. Those might mention the party every once in a while, don't you think?", the International Netwpork for Inclusive Democracy publishes, apart from the on line International journal on Inclusive Democracy, a printed three monthly journal in Greece, an occasional paper in New Jersey and many other publications in the form of books stc. Those might mention the network every once in a while, don't you think? Finally stop the slanders against us because they simply make your so called neutrality even more ridiculous. Nobody from the network has vandalised this page or any other page for that matter AND YOU KNOW THAT. Such tactics are simply against our principles and they are the tactics that others use, particularly your friend Paul Cardan and his various sockpuppets. A Member of the Network.09:00, 31 Dec.2005 (UTC)
 * An additional comment to avoid further 'misunderstandings'. The comment above about four Google hits on the SWP (Greece) referred to hits on specific activities by this branch. If one counts all Google hits that mention its mere existence, in promotion lists by the SWP listing all its branches all over the world, one will find, of course, many more hits--if that matters!


 * Delete. Should I wear my new WikiCabal pin in public? (ESkog)(Talk) 11:13, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete because the cabal asked me to. David | Talk 11:15, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment Ulayiti, I guess the truth hurts. That's why you deleted the comment at your page. By the way Quantum mechanics is not a new concept, except maybe in your mind, of course. Your page was not vandalized, but briefly psychoanalyzed. However, we haven't heard from any administrator about tracing the pornographic vandalism at our page. I am starting to believe it came from, yes, administradroid(s)of wiki. As a cabal you prove our point all the time.User:john sargis 6:26, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sure. Or maybe I deleted it because I did not want to keep a personal attack on my user page. I didn't say that quantum mechanics is a new concept. And, er, what do you mean by 'your page'? Wikipedia articles don't belong to anyone, and I couldn't find any 'pornography' in the page history anyway. - ulayiti (talk)  15:08, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Ulayiti, either this is a sick joke or somebody is playing with wikipedia and you too. Myself and John Sargis saw the pornography content in Inclusive Democracy page and I personally put immediatly a comment in the talk page. Maybe we disagree with you but we would not lie! I don't know what kind of computer knowledge distorted the history page. --TheVel 02:37, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * CommentNo surprise that a well known notable and international figure like David Boothroyd, who deserves his own extended entry in Wikipedia, could not accept non-notable entries like that of the network! 11:50, 29 Dec.2005


 * Vanity FreakofNuture is resorting to vanity ("my page has existed longer..."), as well as ulayiti ("my user name gets 38,600 hits"). FreakofNurture, is the vandalism of which you speak the fact that you spelled Fotopoulos incorrectly? The  assassination which you refer to was actually a vandalization which occurred and stayed on the pages of wiki for several months, when Seigenthaler  was accused of being involved in the assassination. It doesn't say much for the reliability and expertise of information of the administrators at wiki. Anon (in itself unreliable)has stated that Boothroyd is so great, but does not provide anything notable he has invented. You always try to manipulate the field of play. User:john sargis 7:56, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, and only your organization has found it offensive so far. I thought this would hinge on my chess match record, but you've dug deeper by discrediting me on the basis of spelling errors. Really cool, I'll remember that some time, but who is this Boothroyd of whom you speak? &mdash; F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  19:07, Dec. 29, 2005
 * Self. David | Talk 19:52, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Vanity was brought up by the your side. I am pointing out the vanity in your claim. Again, typos were brought up by ulayiti, when a member of our EB misspelled 'hypocrisy' on the Deletion Review/IJID page. So I'm returning the favor. Wrong David: I do not know who Boothroyd is. User:john sargis 16:40, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


 * KEEP. PREVENT WIKIPEDIA FROM SECUMBING TO THE CAPTIALST AGENDA.  HAIL WIKIPEDIA IS COMMUNISM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marx marvelous (talk • contribs) (all other comments by this user were personal attacks and have been removed)


 * Vandalism. One anonymous user had written many brutal and personal attacks against all those who voted "delete". I took the liberty of erasing them, in accordance with WP policy. I know it's pointless, but I'd like to repeat for one more time that I, Paulcardan, only contribute to Wikipedia using my only username, therefore I would kindly appreciate it if you did not start once again (now that I deleted some of your filth) saying that in reality I am behind all this, I am the devil, and what not. Paulcardan 23:39, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Attention: I've indefinitely blocked User:Marx marvelous. If I ever consider unblocking Mr. marvelous, it will not be until this discussion and all related ones are finished. &mdash; F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  00:53, Dec. 31, 2005
 * The comments that "Marx" sockpuppet made have nothing to do with us or the ID network. He did them in purpose in order to slander us. He is probably the same guy: Paul Cardan, DisposableAccount, Llbb etc etc.--TheVel 02:37, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The crude and insulting personal attacks that were aimed at those who voted to delete were not, I repeat, were not perpetrated by anyone associated with the Inclusive Democracy group. It's not necessary for us to resort to such lowly acts. Marx Marvelous is an agent provocateur, to make look as if we are behind it. I agree with TheVel Paul Cardan has assumed another new name: "Marx Marvelous." User:john sargis 22:46, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Per nom. Everything related to inclusive democracy has been deleted or is being deleted.  The supporters all seem to be affiliated with this small group. -- Jbamb 17:45, 31 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment Sure and the supporters of delete are ALL self-declared right wingers, religious conservatives, liberals and Blairites. Long-live WP “neutrality”! By deleting this entry you will simply PROVE the political agenda of Wikipedia. Could you please end this so-called “discussion” on a predetermined resolution and delete the entry immediately? You will spare both your time and ours. Remember though, out of sight is not out of mind! User:john sargis 15:40, 31 December 2005(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.