Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republic of Ogadenia

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. postdlf (talk) 11:31, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of Ogadenia[edit]

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

WP:POVFORK of Ogaden. I wasn't sure if this met the WP:CSD#A10 criterion or not, so instead I placed a WP:PROD tag, which the original editor removed (without comment). I think it also attempts to duplicate Somaliland (see diff), not so much for the content but as a template. Delete (or Speedy delete if, in fact, A10 does apply). --Gyrofrog (talk) 20:26, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. —Gyrofrog (talk) 20:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethiopia-related deletion discussions. —Gyrofrog (talk) 20:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Somalia-related deletion discussions. —Gyrofrog (talk) 20:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a POV-laden content fork of Ogaden. Carrite (talk) 15:58, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Correct use of Template:Infobox country is a reason for deletion? ("attempts to duplicate") Anarchangel (talk) 22:57, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean the "Template:" template, sorry I wasn't clear. I meant using another article as a template (or boilerplate) for a new article - which is fine, in and of itself, if one cleans out the information from the originating article. That wasn't the case here, at least not when I filed this. In other words: it was (and still is) forked from one article (Ogaden), and an inadvertent copy of another (Somaliland). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:05, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and Redirect - Both articles seem to talk about the same place. Original creator of "Republic of Ogadenia" has never edited Ogaden until recently. So probably not a WP:POVFORK. Let's assume good faith since there is no background story to believe that the author just hasn't noticed the other article. Also, new template and resource links could be added to Ogaden article. -- Loukinho (talk) 20:32, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I wouldn't be opposed to this, but it isn't clear what, if anything, in the Infobox should be merged. (I assume the Infobox is is what you meant by new template.) For example, it lists Mohammed Omar Osman as the president. He is the head of the ONLF, but I'm not aware of him being the head of a self-declared or proposed Ogaden state. Likewise, the flag is that of the ONLF. Currently, Ogaden is not (officially) a political subdivision, hence no (official) flag, motto, anthem etc. as specified in the infobox.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Swarm ^X 20:17, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete To my knowledge no organization has proclaimed a "Republic of Ogadenia". Yes the ONLF is dedicated to independence of the Ogaden from Ethiopia, but to my knowledge it has not created any of the structure or trappings of a government. Further, none of the references listed in this article refers to the proclamation, existence or even mentions such a political entity. This article is closer to hoax than even a content fork. -- llywrch (talk) 00:27, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom & Llywrch. While there definitely is a rebel movement going on in the Ogaden region, the political wing of that movement has yet to establish a viable administration of its own. As far as I know, the current, officially recognized administration in the Somali region is regarded as an autonomy within a federal Ethiopia. Of course, this might change in the future. But at the moment, I agree with the aforementioned posters that the article seems a bit premature. Middayexpress (talk) 00:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - self-contradictory nonsense "unrecognised self-declared sovereign state that is internationally recognised" Bazj (talk) 16:52, 18 April 2011 (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.