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. WP:SNOW MBisanz ^talk 00:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Austenasia[edit]

Austenasia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Another micronation, very recently created and listed in the List of micronations. Search returns a grand total of 118 hits. I'm not sure what subset of the notability guidelines this would fall under, but seeing that the list is protected I figure these are created every other day, so pulling to AfD for consensus. §FreeRangeFrog 20:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I guess this falls under WP:WEB, but it doesn't meet the criteria there. One mention in a local newspaper isn't significant real-life media coverage. flaminglawyer 23:22, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Wikipedia is not for things you made up. Some guy decided to write an article stating that his house is a country. That doesn't make it so. --L. Pistachio (talk) 23:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it did get a mention in a local newspaper. It wasn't declared so on WP. flaminglawyer 23:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But he did make it up... flaminglawyer 23:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Molossia was also made up just like Austenasia, but that has an article written about it. Austenasia has been written about in a newspaper and is mentioned on lots of other micronation's webpages.jshn 17:33, 26 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trausten2 (talk • contribs) — Trausten2 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• DeleteWay too obscure. --Sloane (talk) 05:16, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no sign of notability. Edward321 (talk) 06:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as it stands now, it fails WP:V, not enough 3rd party mention, it could even be a hoax. Mixed history of keeping such articles, Principality of Sealand is here, with extensive 3rd party coverage, police shoot-outs and all. But Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danmark (island) was (rightfully) deleted. Perhaps the solution would be to create a List of contested micronations with amusement value Power.corrupts (talk) 11:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. It fails WP:GNG and arguably comes under WP:NOTNEWS. Bondegezou (talk) 12:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Single mention in a local news. Fails notability criteria. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 16:14, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Do not delete Is mentioned in lots of other micronations websites, is quite an active micronation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trausten2 (talk • contribs) 08:40, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And those websites are self published sources, so they are not reliable. So they do not demonstrate notability. Taemyr (talk) 00:21, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per most above and as per the rule that freeweb/web sites cant be used as ref's/sources.  rdunnPLIB  08:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Sources are largely self-published, SYN, or Wikipedia entries. THF (talk) 00:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Do not delete What about the Republic of Saugeais? That has only two references, at least one of which is self published, but that's not nominated for deletion. Austenasia is a far more prominent micronation, with more reliable references and a greater number of them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trausten2 (talk • contribs) 08:59, 1 March 2009 (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.