Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hajdučka Republika Mijata Tomića (2nd nomination)

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 redirect to Blidinje Nature Park. Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 11:51, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hajdučka Republika Mijata Tomića[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Obscure tabloid coverage, an article by the globally banned User:Kubura, likely WP:COI and WP:self-promotion (see 'purported currency'). Vipz (talk) 15:08, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bosnia and Herzegovina-related deletion discussions. Vipz (talk) 15:08, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, $Salvio giuliano$ 16:23, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As it has survived AFD previously, even with a no consensus close, we can't just soft delete this for low participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles (talk) 18:06, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails GNG. As the article states, the is a tourist destination, a "self-proclaimed fictional micronation" so it makes sense that the sources in the article and BEFORE are promo, travel, articles. // Timothy :: talk 15:50, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: final relist, because this article is ineligible for soft deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, $Salvio giuliano$ 08:25, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Blidinje Nature Park under subsection title and leave a redirect. I was curious so I checked Pageviews stats for this article, and, amazingly, it has more page views than Blidinje nature park page, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's more visited page than any average Balkan scope article.from heritage, tourism and environment categories. That's not an excuse for standalone article but there is no reason to have paragraph or two in mentioned article. Actually, I wanted to move some prose over there and expand on its existing Trivia subsection, when I noted temp.msg.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 11:12, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I have moved prose from the AfD to Blidinje_Nature_Park#Hajdučka_Republika_Mijata_Tomića, because standalone is really unattainable per notability; I would leave a redirect, however.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 01:11, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, apart from serving as an appropriate redirect to content covered elsewhere, it is also required to still exist for attribution. Thanks for doing the merge! As for pageviews stats, I presume much of it is contributed from curious clicks originating from the {{Micronations}} navbox (this is how I ended up finding this article). –Vipz (talk) 02:05, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tentatively Keep: I've just done some editing on that page, adding its current website, and an "External links" item to a page there of news clippings about it (in Croatian). Unfortunately things like date and even name of newspaper aren't shown, so it will take some time to track them down and cite them properly... but at least for now you can see that there are quite a few news stories about the subject. Pending dates and publication details, it looks like they're visibly "newsworthy" in the papers' opinions, whether or not ours. If they're all one newspaper, or a house publication, I'll change my mind; hence the tentativeness of my "Keep". – _•Raven ^.talk 02:13, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I actually tried the same few years ago, I even tried to upload img's of CoA, but it was futile effort. The article itself is a messy and contradictory, which can only lead to a confusion among readers. Small number of sources is understandable because the whole thing was literally of a temporary nature and an advertising idea and project for an emerging family business than some kind of protest by the local community; after all, I am inclined to think that the community should consist of more than one small family with (currently) two members in order to be considered a kinda protest micronation. There is simply no way to make it notable. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 19:24, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Have you seen the current 'Constitution' page (PDF), listing 69 officers, or the passport issued for €65 to guests and online applicants (shown in the Al Jazeera video report)? There are many more than "two members" involved. – _•Raven ^.talk 22:36, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect to Blidinje Nature Park per above.4meter4 (talk) 03:58, 10 April 2023 (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.