Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sigave National Association

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 of the debate was Delete. - Bobet 14:54, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sigave National Association[edit]

~~This seems to be a hoax (see also above). No ghits apart from Wikipedia [1]. Delete. Mak (talk) 18:20, 9 April 2006 (UTC)~~[reply]

- Comment sorry, forgot to spell it out, unverifiable. Mak (talk) 02:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Withdraw due to new source (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tuatafa Hori). Mak (talk) 03:28, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Con Dem^Talk 02:39, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Speedy~~ delete per nom. Feezo (Talk) 02:49, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as hoax. Royboy crashfan 19:03, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; fake political party promoting a possibly-fake princess --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 03:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If there is a farthest corner of the world left in this day and age, it might well be Sigave. I suspect this article and the accompanying one need to be deleted as unverifiable. Not necessarily a hoax. I don't see any way to determine whether the princess or the party exist or not. Fan1967 03:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[2] also no ghits for it in French, but the editor has found one geocities site. I don't generally feel that these are a particularly good source. Mak (talk) 04:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as above. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 06:27, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Reading the article as opposed to the nominations, this does not seem inherently implausible. Keep unless provenly untrue -- SockpuppetSamuelson

Comment That is exactly the opposite of Wikpedia rules on verifiability. The article must be verifiably true. "You can't prove it's false" is not a sufficient justification to keep. Fan1967 12:54, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Quite so; an unfortunate truism on AfD is the number of people who vote Keep because they don't have enough information to delete. IMHO, the onus is on the article creator and supporters to provide that evidence, and if a few minutes of research can't turn any up, let's Delete until verification of an article's notability or factual nature turns up. RGTraynor 15:39, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nonverifiable per Fan1967 —WAvegetarian•_{_{CONTRIBUTIONS}}^{^TALK}• ^{^EMAIL}• 15:31, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, article can't be WP:V sourced.--Isotope23 16:27, 10 April 2006 (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.