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 keep. seicer | talk | contribs 14:12, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dominion of Melchizedek (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This "nation" is a dangerous hoax (it literally does not exist), and the only legitimate wiki on the topic is to discuss it as such. Lending legitimacy to this hoax by acknowledging it as a "nation" (even while acknowledging frauds associated with it) with a "history", on Wikipedia only contributes to the further harm its abusers can wage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akc2114 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 6 September 2008

• Note – I properly formatted this discussion after it was created. I have no comment at this time about the deletion itself. —Salmar ^(talk) 15:56, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• KeepSpeedy keep - Nomination does not use arguments from policy or guidelines, and it is not described as a nation but as a Micronation -- see our article which says such may only exist in the minds of its creator(s). I do worry a bit about some of the sources though.

• Strong keep Article is referenced about notable thing. There are many articles about various hoaxes, and if properly labeled, there is no harm. --Yopie 18:56, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

• Strong keep To respond to the deletion request, the article makes clear that this micronation is associated with fraud, and if anything this article might help a reader avoid such a scam. Whozatmac (talk) 23:49, 6 September 2008 (UTC)whozatmac[reply]

• Keep Article is clearly referenced including clearing showing how the micronation is associated with fraud. No valid deletion rationale has been given. Edward321 (talk) 23:58, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Per all the above comments. Nominator is a single-purpose sock account created for the purposes of disrupting WP. --Gene_poole (talk) 04:28, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong delete This "micronation" is not more than the criminal history of a family. Adam233 (talk) 11:54, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments And how does that make it unencyclopedic? WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not a good reason for deletion. Doug Weller (talk) 15:11, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comments And WP:ILIKEIT is not a good reason for keeping. Adam233 (talk) 17:33, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment As this is an AfD, we need policy or guideline reasons to delete it, the default is keep. It is clearly notable, so I can see no WP related reason to delete it. Doug Weller (talk) 18:02, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concern - We seem to have 2 SPA accounts trying to delete this article. The editor making the nom has made no other edits, Adam233's main contributions have been to raise an AfD for another micronation [1]. We are wasting our time here. I've changed my keep to Speedy keep, and would like to know how we can check to see if the two editors asking for deletion are the same. Doug Weller (talk) 18:14, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I see the argument for keeping the entry in light of the definition of a micronation (which I did mistake for a microstate when requesting the deletion initially). At this point, I am not particularly opposed to keeping the entry, but I do still think that it would be helpful for people who may be potentially duped by the con artists using the DoM to deceive people (as it seems is its only purpose) to be told up front that this "nation" does not exist, and it has only ever been associated with cheating people. As it is now, it appears to be an entry for some semi-legitimate political entity (which only has credit fraud associated with it), which I was concerned could only cause further damage and appear to lend credibility to cons that use it. My hope was that the entry could be changed to something along the lines of "The Hoax of the DoM". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akc2114 (talk • contribs)

• Comment I have to agree with Akc2114. Many so-called "micronations" are rather hoaxes than micronations. But the Wikipedia articles give them a credibility they don't deserve. Adam233 (talk) 21:43, 7 September 2008 (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.