Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Macabrismo
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Tikiwont (talk) 09:13, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Humourous hoax about a non-notable neologism. (Website author states his poetry constitutes a new genre.)Nehwyn (talk) 20:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete does not meet WP:NOTE and is a Neologism. Gtstricky (talk) 21:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete seems to be in use in Spanish and Italian, but not in English. JohnCD (talk) 21:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. -Yupik (talk) 01:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
KeepDelete- and I urge the other votes to reconsider. The word may be a neologism, but it is definitely in use in Italian, Spanish AND Portuguese. Judging from the 820 hits I got for the term on Google, it's not spurious, but serious. I suspect there is a lot more text available out there on the Internet that could support a decent article. Cbdorsett (talk) 14:07, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I would urge you to reconsider, actually. Even should that be the case, the article in its current form is little more than a joke. The first sentence reads: "The major representatives of this current, beyond the literary and philosophic, go under an alias because common mortals (you non-poet folks) are not yet able to understand them (a lot of exercise needed for that); They are:" And what follows is a list of made-up names with a small poem for each one. It's not an article; merely a hoax. --Nehwyn (talk) 14:56, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - If you look at the only website sited in the article it states that the only use of Macabrismo (in the sense) is by the web page author. The other google hits you found are a different meaning. The term does not exist in English and they article leads you to believe that it does. Gtstricky (talk) 14:56, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No claim in article (at least, in the English portion) of meeting WP:Notability. Just 11 ghits in English, none of which are showing notability. If the word is notable in Italian, Spanish and Portuguese, then it belongs in those wikipedias; without notability in English, it doesn't belong in the English wikipedia. (And usage does not equal notability.)--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Again - please understand this is not a serious article. A foreign poetic trend might be notable even if it's not part of English language literature - only this is not a serious article; it's a humorous hoax written (mostly) in another language. --Nehwyn (talk) 15:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I feel I should add that in the meantime, the author has been blocked for repeated vandalism on Macabrism - he was trying to re-insert his hoax there. --Nehwyn (talk) 18:56, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you all for the open discussion. I have reconsidered. Personally, I don't feel like writing an article about Macabrism in Portuguese, Spanish and Italian literature - I've got plenty to do already. Yes, 'tis clearly a hoax, which becomes quite apparent when you consider the history, starting with changing a redirect page into an "article", continuing with a triple revert and other gems, then the re-emergence into a page with non-English title and non-English text. I also note that there is no article in Wikipedia in any of the other named languages. Cbdorsett (talk) 05:06, 9 December 2007 (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.