![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 June 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gulmammad, for the love of everything that is good, please read WP:RS. A blog is not a reliable source and that is why it was removed. The fact that you would add it back is just tendentious editing. Pocopocopocopoco ( talk) 02:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
In tendentious editing it says: "Tendentious editing is editing which is partisan, biased, skewed—in other words, it does not conform to the neutral point of view" which is not the case here. The fact which is supported by what you call a blog, to me doesn't hurt anyone, or does it? If it does, how? Gülməmməd Talk 03:10, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Please see the discussion at the reliable sources noticeboard regarding this article and Sheylanli. Also, please explain why this article is notable. I'm sure that if the Sheylan tribe really exists and is notable it would have more written about it than some obscure blog. Pocopocopocopoco ( talk) 22:36, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Pocopocopocopoco, please consider this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheylanli tribe . I might ask another admin to look over the discussion again as you are still not satisfied. Gülməmməd Talk 04:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I think Poco's templates has become redundant. The sources which are still perceived by him to be suspicious are already tagged using inline templates. Another tag, requesting help with expansion, is also redundant as we already have two stub-sorting templates attached to the page. As for the WP:RSN discussion, it is normally linked from the talk page. Please opine. -- Kober Talk 20:45, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
The source provided doesn't even mention any spelling of Sheylanli or any relocation to the Aghjabadi rayon. Pocopocopocopoco ( talk) 02:03, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 June 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gulmammad, for the love of everything that is good, please read WP:RS. A blog is not a reliable source and that is why it was removed. The fact that you would add it back is just tendentious editing. Pocopocopocopoco ( talk) 02:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
In tendentious editing it says: "Tendentious editing is editing which is partisan, biased, skewed—in other words, it does not conform to the neutral point of view" which is not the case here. The fact which is supported by what you call a blog, to me doesn't hurt anyone, or does it? If it does, how? Gülməmməd Talk 03:10, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Please see the discussion at the reliable sources noticeboard regarding this article and Sheylanli. Also, please explain why this article is notable. I'm sure that if the Sheylan tribe really exists and is notable it would have more written about it than some obscure blog. Pocopocopocopoco ( talk) 22:36, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Pocopocopocopoco, please consider this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheylanli tribe . I might ask another admin to look over the discussion again as you are still not satisfied. Gülməmməd Talk 04:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I think Poco's templates has become redundant. The sources which are still perceived by him to be suspicious are already tagged using inline templates. Another tag, requesting help with expansion, is also redundant as we already have two stub-sorting templates attached to the page. As for the WP:RSN discussion, it is normally linked from the talk page. Please opine. -- Kober Talk 20:45, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
The source provided doesn't even mention any spelling of Sheylanli or any relocation to the Aghjabadi rayon. Pocopocopocopoco ( talk) 02:03, 20 July 2008 (UTC)