Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republic of Kekistan

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2017 June 12.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:06, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of Kekistan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Less than one step away from a hoax. No notability. Just an invention that got tweeted about. Fails utterly to meet WP:GNG. Should be speedily deleted if there is a suitable category Velella ^{Velella Talk} 20:56, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As explained in the articles and also the Legitimacy page in the references on the Kekistan website, this as legitimate country as places like Liberland, Sealand, Hutt River, and other places that are listed on Wikipedia. It has been endorsed by Russia, and it has a constitution, a government, a flag and a coat of arms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinthomas1864 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete until such time as Trump hears about it and decides to bomb it. Hyperbolick (talk) 21:21, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Has received recognition from the Russian Embassy to the UK, and has legal documents, such as a constitution on their website. They also have received more international recognition and notability than most micronations ~ not a hoax or a troll. They have the ability to be contacted and enter diplomatic relations, this can be done through their social media. It appears a lot of effort has been put into creating their legal basis, something that a simple 'hoax' or 'troll' could. KEEP & LET EXPAND Urshankov (talk) 21:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - there are notable micronations, but this is not one of them. A hashtag in a tweet from an embassy ≠ official recognition by that government. If there is any "international recognition and notability" please show where that is, because it's not included in the article nor is it anywhere to be found through Internet searches. --bonadea contributions talk 21:32, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperbolick reveals his reason for bias, when he refers to Trump. As (talk) has pointed out, this micronation has more legal recognition than many others here on Wikipedia, as it's been mentioned on a website of a major world power. Russian Embassy to the UK It has a constitution. It's been mentioned in news outlets such as Buzzfeed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinthomas1864 (talk • contribs) 21:52, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete Guys, guys. I don't know if I'm more embarrassed that this wasn't CSD'd or that we're wasting time discussing this. There couldn't be a better example of a hoax. "kek" is a well known meme-ing term. What's next to it? "Dat boi island?" We're getting trolled fellas, and having a "flag" and "constitution" is about as credible as "Donald Drumpf". Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 22:08, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per WP:G3 (hoax) and warn the involved editors for introducing deliberate factual errors into Wikipedia. Exemplo347 (talk) 22:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kek is also featured throughout Ancient Egyptian Ogdoad cosmogony, as can be seen here. This micronation also appears to be based on the geographic history of the origins of the Egyptian mythical creature. Rejecting the basis that a nation can be founded upon these fundamental principles would mean that we would have no nations to this day, as every single one has originated from a deity of some kind. I'm sure if this micronation kept it's traditional name of 'The Principality of Jonesia' you would have no issue with such? I am aware that this has become part of some 'meme' culture, but this micronation seems incredibly serious, and is far more functional than most of those in the list. Urshankov (talk) 22:21, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Urshankov: At the risk of getting myself warned or blocked, can you please stop trolling us with your bullshit? Take that nonsense back to 4chan where it belongs. Exemplo347 (talk) 22:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Exemplo347: If you're honestly trying to throw a petty insult because someone has done something you disagree with, you need to become more mature and realise people don't actually follow your little ideals. Due to such inflammatory and ridiculous behaviour, I would like to see your prior comment made invalid - as I'm sure if you read the rules you would understand that this is a discussion thread and is no place for personal attacks. Urshankov (talk) 22:30, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

From comments such as Exemplo347 moaning about 4chan, and Drewmutt saying "Donald Drumpf", it is clear that you are showing bias against this actual country simply because of your political beliefs, and trying to delete articles that do not reflect your political ideology. The threat to block Urshankov is out of order. It is meant to be a fair balanced encyclopedia. This is a real country, that has been granted recognition by Russia and features in Buzzfeed. It has more credibility than the other micronations Wikipedia lists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinthomas1864 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP & LET EXPAND Wikipedia has pages for other micronations such as Sealand, Hutt River etc.., all of which have received less international recognition and are less organised than this one. If Wikipedia has pages for these micro-nations, this micro-nation should definitely be allowed to have its own page. MeekoMeeko (talk) 22:31, 14 April 2017 (UTC) — MeekoMeeko (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Seconded.

Abusing multiple accounts can get you banned from Wikipedia, particularly when you do it during Article for Deletion discussions. Exemplo347 (talk) 22:32, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Exemplo347: Who're you accusing of multiple accounts? As far as your lewd behaviour goes, it is unacceptable for this 'discussion' as you yourself have called it. Urshankov (talk) 22:34, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stop accusing people of making multiple account and actually engage in a reasonable, well argued, fact-based discussion as to why Kekistan should not be accepted into the community of nations despite satisfying the required criteria for a nation more successfully than any other micro-nation on this entire website. MeekoMeeko (talk) 22:41, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Exemplo347 that's a bit low, suggesting everyone who disagrees with you is the same person - so is everyone posting to delete this page the same person? Ok, Exemplo347, Hyperbolick, Velella, Bonadea, Drewmutt are the same person and should be barred from Wikipedia for trying to delete articles that don't satisfy their Democrat party political agenda.

KEEP & LET EXPAND Kekistan has a constitution, land, international recognition and a citizenry willing to give their lives for the nation if need be. Hardly any other nation on earth can claim to have such a stature of statehood. Long Live Kekistan and LONG LIVE THE WIKIPEDIA PAGE! SHADILAY! Kekistani Nationalist (talk) 22:45, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The page should stay as Kekistan does have international recognition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparkle1984 (talk • contribs) 22:41, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There are nicer ways to tell people to cease and desist (oh wow! see?) then calling stuff sh*t of the bull. L3X1 (distant write) 22:44, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@L3X1: IHello, may I ask why you have opened an investigation against me, although there is no evidence of your claims I am willing to be IP checked and such, just to prove that this is not true, and is infact, a false allegation. Urshankov (talk) 22:51, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Check my ID - this is no sock puppet. Kevinthomas1864 (talk) 23:51, 14 April 2017 (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.