Diskusia s redaktorom:Vasiľ: Rozdiel medzi revíziami

→‎Ill Bethisad: @Bronto, Vasyl'
(→‎Ill Bethisad: @Bronto, Vasyl')
::Za to mi to samozrejme nestojí...Tak mu povedz nech napíše o jazyku. A tie jeho zdroje by si mal niekto pozrieť, keď už sa tu háda. [[Redaktor:Bronto|Bronto]] 02:36, 20. november 2009 (UTC)
:::Časť som pozrel, sú to iba zmienky, v ktorých sa hovorí o nadšencoch alternatívnej hitórie. [[Redaktor:Vasiľ|Vasiľ]] 02:40, 20. november 2009 (UTC)
::::What exactly do you mean by "keby šlo o jazyk nezmazal by som ho"? I hope you are not saying articles about languages don't need any references, while articles about other subjects do. In any case, I'm not saying all sources I've given are fully valid ones, but most of them are published sources that do not merely mention the project but discuss it in more detail. This proves at least one thing: the subject is not obviously non-notable. Like I said, I have deliberately avoided arguments like "Ill Bethisad is a well-known phenomenon among conlangers and alternate history enthusiasts", as well as links to internet fora, mailing lists and the like, because I'm well aware that these things are usually not taken into consideration.
::::But then again, I think a meritorical discussion should take place in a proper deletion debate and not on somebody's talk page. What I am disputing is not deletion by itself, but '''the way it was done''' and '''the argument that was used'''. Unless wp.sk has rules that are significantly different from other editions, this article should not have been speedily deleted. Especially since it was instigated by an anonymous user from hell knows where, who just might be a vandal or a troll as far as I'm concerned, who popped in and dropped a bomb, using no other argument than linking to an obsolete deletion discussion from wp.en (with 2 people using arguments in favour of deleting, and 2 in favour of keeping, I should add). I find it very odd if you don't have a problem listing to such a person, while you obviously do have problem listing to somebody who uses arguments and produces evidence. It is also disrespectful towards the author of the article (not me, and as far as I know, nobody related to the project), who hasn't even had a chance to defend his text. Therefore all I'm asking is that you undo a decision that clearly went against the rules, and subject the article to a normal deletion discussion. S pozdravom, [[Redaktor:IJzeren Jan|IJzeren Jan]] 12:08, 20. november 2009 (UTC)