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.
This is an island that an accused criminal fleeing prosecution purchased & declared a "nation." Fails
WP:GNG by all appearances, even if this were to somehow be recognized as a country it's
WP:TOOSOON. At best it would rate a mention at
Nithyananda.
JamesG5 (
talk)
08:45, 4 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Do Not Delete
This is a current event which we don't know fully about. Information on this page can change rapidly. Even if this country ceases to exist in near future, we should save the page as a historical event. If the current event doesn't generate much information then we should transfer this page to Nithyananda page.
Delete: per Serjatt6's opening sentence. "This is a current event which we don't know fully about" is a great, concise summary of
Wikipedia is not for news. Even as an island, it's not inhabited and hasn't received much significant coverage, so I'm doubtful if it meets
GEOLAND. Per JamesG5, it's just
too soon. If lots of reliable sources start referring to this island as such, there might be a case to make for having it redirect to
Nithyananda#Fugitive, but it's still not notable in itself, at least at the moment. SITH(talk)11:40, 4 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Don't Delete Delete(changed from dont delete) As for Notabilty, it has been widely reported about on Indian cable news and the Wikipedia page of kailaasa already has two third party sources. Also it shouldn't be treated as a sovereign nation but as a
micronation and there are many articles about different micronations on Wikipedia. I agree that it's too soon but I dont think it should be deleted because of that
Ankur Bhandari (
talk) 8:28 pm
Comment while I think this should be deleted for other reasons, I just want to note that Twitter account is two months old, not verified and we have no way of telling if it's legitimate and it should not be used for anything.
Praxidicae (
talk)
16:39, 6 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Which is another reason we shouldn't be considering TNN an RS. I was about to post at RSN for this exact reason as it's not the first time they've failed to fact check. See here: Take for example,
this piece, which comes from
this on
this controversial topic. A 5 second search would show anyone with the ability to read that the account they cited for the press release is not legitimate and they take the word of another source, like a game of telephone.
This is the supposed tweet it is all based on. It is 2 months old and the embassy's
.gov website links their official account
TwitterFacebook, neither of which have published this supposed press release nor do they make mention of the subject. In fact, searching for the supposed text/word the embassy released gives nothing but rehashed articles citing The News Minute. I would expect any journalist or publication with a modicum of integrity to do basic fact checking and it appears that they do not.
Praxidicae (
talk)
18:28, 6 December 2019 (UTC)reply
ANI and ethics -LOL. At any case, TNN is not a RS, IMO (and I will argue to such extents, over RSN) and Dhanya is way too invested in debunking Nithyananda's cult, to expect unbiased coverage.
∯WBGconverse14:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
This is an island that an accused criminal fleeing prosecution purchased & declared a "nation." Fails
WP:GNG by all appearances, even if this were to somehow be recognized as a country it's
WP:TOOSOON. At best it would rate a mention at
Nithyananda.
JamesG5 (
talk)
08:45, 4 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Do Not Delete
This is a current event which we don't know fully about. Information on this page can change rapidly. Even if this country ceases to exist in near future, we should save the page as a historical event. If the current event doesn't generate much information then we should transfer this page to Nithyananda page.
Delete: per Serjatt6's opening sentence. "This is a current event which we don't know fully about" is a great, concise summary of
Wikipedia is not for news. Even as an island, it's not inhabited and hasn't received much significant coverage, so I'm doubtful if it meets
GEOLAND. Per JamesG5, it's just
too soon. If lots of reliable sources start referring to this island as such, there might be a case to make for having it redirect to
Nithyananda#Fugitive, but it's still not notable in itself, at least at the moment. SITH(talk)11:40, 4 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Don't Delete Delete(changed from dont delete) As for Notabilty, it has been widely reported about on Indian cable news and the Wikipedia page of kailaasa already has two third party sources. Also it shouldn't be treated as a sovereign nation but as a
micronation and there are many articles about different micronations on Wikipedia. I agree that it's too soon but I dont think it should be deleted because of that
Ankur Bhandari (
talk) 8:28 pm
Comment while I think this should be deleted for other reasons, I just want to note that Twitter account is two months old, not verified and we have no way of telling if it's legitimate and it should not be used for anything.
Praxidicae (
talk)
16:39, 6 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Which is another reason we shouldn't be considering TNN an RS. I was about to post at RSN for this exact reason as it's not the first time they've failed to fact check. See here: Take for example,
this piece, which comes from
this on
this controversial topic. A 5 second search would show anyone with the ability to read that the account they cited for the press release is not legitimate and they take the word of another source, like a game of telephone.
This is the supposed tweet it is all based on. It is 2 months old and the embassy's
.gov website links their official account
TwitterFacebook, neither of which have published this supposed press release nor do they make mention of the subject. In fact, searching for the supposed text/word the embassy released gives nothing but rehashed articles citing The News Minute. I would expect any journalist or publication with a modicum of integrity to do basic fact checking and it appears that they do not.
Praxidicae (
talk)
18:28, 6 December 2019 (UTC)reply
ANI and ethics -LOL. At any case, TNN is not a RS, IMO (and I will argue to such extents, over RSN) and Dhanya is way too invested in debunking Nithyananda's cult, to expect unbiased coverage.
∯WBGconverse14:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)reply
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.