Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timonia


 * 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   Speedy deleted WP:CSD by Christopher Parham. Non-admin closure. JohnCD (talk) 13:59, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Timonia

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested PROD. A More Perfect Onion (talk) 19:49, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * My reason for PROD: Unsourced micronation (poss nanonation), quite likely a thing made up one day recently. Come back when duly recognized at least by other micronations and verifiably sourced.
 * Article creator's edit summary contesting the PROD: Timonia meets all criteria by definition of Micronation by the sourced References and has existed for a little over 1 month. A signed and dated contract recognized Timonia as a sovergn nation.


 * Delete. Is there any reason why it can't be speedy deleted per Criteria_for_speedy_deletion? Cassandra 73 (talk) 20:18, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete no reliable source coverage at this time, probably just something madeup one day trying to get 15 minutes of fame. About A7, not sure that this would fall under a group, but I think a case could be made that this is a group with no assertion of notability.   GB fan  talk 20:21, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. What is the point of being recognized by other micronations? They aren't recognized by any real nations themselves, so why is their recognition important? They were also 'just made up' one day, but they get a place here? Please explain to me why they have a place? Bocephusjohnson (talk) 20:47, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. JohnCD (talk) 20:53, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Although we probably have too many micronations with articles in Wikipedia, it does appear that some of the ones that do have articles here have received some coverage in reliable sources and could claim to meet the general notability guideline. If anyone points out a Wikipedia article about a micronation that does not meet that guideline, I would likely support deleting that article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:38, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete for lack of any reliable independent source to indicate notability, also per WP:NFT. JohnCD (talk) 20:53, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, per WP:MADEUP, and as nonsense. - RUL3R *trolling *vandalism 21:04, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Google search has not found anything. Notability is questionable. No reliable/pertinant sources. References that are provided in the article does NOT even talk about Timonia, but rather about Micronation. Jolenine ( Talk  -  My Contribs ) 22:29, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. No relevant sources have been provided, and I doubt that any exist. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:39, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete as an obvious hoax. B figura  (talk) 04:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: All that I can for this is Wikipedia and Wikirage. Joe Chill (talk) 12:10, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy deleted. Christopher Parham (talk) 13:38, 12 October 2009 (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.