Diskusia s redaktorom:Vasiľ: Rozdiel medzi revíziami

→‎Ill Bethisad: added some more
(→‎Ill Bethisad: added some more)
::Perhaps worth mentioning is that a similar thing has been going on with the constructed language [[Slovio]]. It was deleted from the English wikipedia in the same period and for exactly the same reasons. Yet, here on the Slovak wiki it was decided it should be kept, although this particular subject can't even produce half of the number of independent sources Ill Bethisad can. I've been told this was because the creator of Slovio is Slovak, but I don't know if that's true.
::In any case, it's good that we're having this discussion. Only, we shouldn't be having it here, but in a page that discusses whether or not an article should be deleted. Like I said, I don't mind having the discussion, and I don't mind if the article is deleted the right way and for the right reasons. But in this case it is neither the right way nor the right reasons. S pozdravom, [[Redaktor:IJzeren Jan|IJzeren Jan]] 21:51, 19. november 2009 (UTC)
 
::There is one more thing I'd like to add. Slovio is indeed an interesting case, very similar to this one. Please have a look at [[Diskusia:Slovio]], because it gives us an interesting case study. Indeed, it is boldly written: '''The deletion in the en wikipedia was a mistake''' and '''in addition, it was invented by a Slovak, therefore it is certainly relevant for this wikipedia'''. Therefore, the Slovio article was allowed to stay, in spite of the fact that the article '''contains no references or sources whatsoever'''. And believe me: although I personally dó think Slovio deserves an article, you won't find even half of the independent sources Ill Bethisad can produce.
::For that matter, I had a quick look at a few other articles about constructed languages. [[Esperanto]], [[Ido]], [[Interlingua]], [[Slovio]], [[Toki pona]], [[Glosolalia]], [[Quenijčina]], [[Volapük]], as well as quite a few other articles... none of these give even the slightest indication of notability! There are no sources, no references, external links only to self-published websites. Of course, bombing the Slovak wikipedia back into the Stone Age wouldn't be a good idea at all, and therefore I'm certainly not proposing deleting those. But I'm wondering why in the case of Ill Bethisad your demands are suddenly so extremely high - and all this based on the anonymous interference of a person who doesn't even give a proper explanation, but simply give a link to an old discussion at enwiki. [[Redaktor:IJzeren Jan|IJzeren Jan]] 00:02, 20. november 2009 (UTC)
17

úprav