Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Treno (micronation)
- 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 delete. Fritzpoll (talk) 13:42, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Treno (micronation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
A made-up "micronation" with exactly one Google hit (a website under construction), referenced with that site and a Wikia wiki, and posted by User:KingAlex, apparently one of the "founders". ArglebargleIV (talk) 23:20, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete based on no indication that it has been noticed by the rest of the world. It's refreshing to read an article about a micronation, and never find out where it's located. Mandsford (talk) 23:55, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as something made up one day. WillOakland (talk) 06:59, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Simple posts of "delete its made up" Should not apply to this article and moreover a google search should not qualify as verifying notereity. Every micronation is made up, and most on wikipedia have done nothing of merit except garner more attention then others. A mere reading of List of micronations demonstrates this. Several nations on this list boast no wikipedia article however are included. If a near total ban on original micronation posts such as these exists, as it appears from other articles of deletion demonstrates, please include this on the notoriety web page with specific reference to micronations or original research. --KingAlex (talk) 13:19, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Just because other bad articles exist isn't a reason why this one should stay -- it's a reason why other articles should be cleaned up or removed. Also, while Google isn't the final arbiter of notability, given that there is absolutely nothing about Treno that isn't self-published, Treno just isn't notable at all. -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 13:30, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- All work is self published before being published elsewhere, if no one reported on the Declaration of Independence would America still exist? simply because I am currently the sole publisher does not mean the country is my own or the ideas my own. I am a founding member yes, but I am simply posting a profile on a country. I no where declare myself supreme ruler or otherwise aggrandize myself because it is not MY country. Treno does not have a leader because of it's practice of direct democracy and self governance. Notoriety is next to impossible for a micronation to attain because most news outlets don't care and government's don't acknowledge they exist. So, barring every member of the Trenian population stripping naked with the words "Treno for Life" painted on their bodies and running through the streets Treno won't get the notoriety wikipedia claims to require. Seeking notoriety for notoriety's sake is the real ego trip here, not Treno --KingAlex (talk) 15:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Currently many road blocks stand in the way of groups like Treno. The United Nations prohibits sovereign nations that don't have dry ground under their feet. Many of these breakaway groups are mislabeled as anarchists by macro nations." (http://www.exploretreno.com/Treno.pdf) And one more--Users on Wikipedia vote Delete on articles like this. Micronations need to have some external notability before they become listed here. Wikipedia is not for their introduction to the world. Eauhomme (talk) 17:56, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete. If Wikipedia is not the place to publish words you made up on one day, it's certainly not the place for countries you made up on one day. How many deletes do we need before I can invoke the snowball clause? Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 21:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete - non-notable group. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - even if it exists, it can not be verified by secondary sources -- core policies. See also non-notable places. Bearian (talk) 16:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - a micronation covered in multiple reliable sources would be a keep. This is not an example of such. -- Whpq (talk) 16:46, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong delete - per spam, notability, verifiability and advertising. The main contributor is User:KingAlex, who seems to have a severe conflict of interest with the subject, since being the "founder" of this nation. Also, is "delusions of grandeur" a suitable deletion reason? Greggers (t • c) 10:31, 8 April 2009 (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.