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. Can be recreated if and when reliable sources are found.  Sandstein  09:31, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shinsi[edit]

Shinsi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Not notable: a random place-name from Korean mythistory. OR, no cites. Ogress _smash! 06:52, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ogress: I found references below:

www.taekwondobible.com/korculture/spirit/myth.html

www.san-shin.org/Dan-gun_Myth.htm

www.lifeinkorea.com/information/tangun.cfm

It may or may not be an outright hoax, but it may not be notable and has OR, so I'm on the fence for now. I was also about to nominate Sanamahism for deletion for the same reason, but I was questioned and decided to let it slide for now. Racer-Ωmegα 07:33, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, even if it is a hoax, this may be older than Jar'Edo Wens by a few months, but I'm still left undecided whether to endorse deletion or not. Racer-Ωmegα 07:35, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment It is mentioned in passing (allegedly) in two medieval mythistories as the place a divine ancestor landed when he descended from Heaven. "Shinshi" is the modern Korean pronunciation of the Chinese words "god/spirit + city". The divine man descended from heaven and built a Divine City. That is the entirety of its presence in the material: not notable. Ogress _smash! 16:49, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose: This is not some random place-name or OR as Ogress insultingly describes Korean tradition. There was a lot of material from pseudohistorical sources, or hoaxes, to which I opposed multiple times and deleted. This however was to no avail by other editors who kept adding information based on pseudohistorical sources. I removed such material based on pseudohistory to improve the article per given requirements of the former deletion tag. To answer Racer-Ωmegα, this Shinsi is not a hoax, nor is it OR. It is based on multiple historical sources. It is widely accepted in Korean academic literature, such as the Encyclopedia of Korean Culture. It also has a counterpart in multiple language, with a more detailed article in Korean. Cydevil38 (talk) 08:31, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 13:42, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 13:43, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The page is uncited and refers only to the place where a mythical divine man descended from Heaven in the mythistories of medieval Korea. I flagged it as a potential hoax, and you yourself state it was full of hoax material. "tae kwon do bible" is not a reliable source, nor is san-shin.org or lifeinkorea.com. Ogress _smash! 16:45, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopedia of Korean Culture is a reliable source, which I cited. Cydevil38 (talk) 18:22, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Cydevil38: You mentioned it, not cited. Which edition did you use? Is it online? If printed, what page? Who is the author? Etc. Please cite properly. I'd vote keep if you could provide a proper citation. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:18, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep -- If a place is mentioned in a myth, it can be regarded as a real place in the terms of the myth. Of course how far a myth has an element of history in it and how far it is fiction is a different question. I am fairly certain that we have articles on places mentioned in Indian epics, which are equally mythical, and I do not see why Korean ones should be different. Essentially, this is the residence of a mythical ancestor, whose son founded what is now the capital of North Korea. This makes it a precursor capital. That is certainly notable. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:44, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment While I'd like to see more articles on Korean mythology, this stub article is unhelpful. It mentions no records of the legend, no scholarly sources and no influence on modern Korean believes. Compare with the article on the equally mythological Land of Nod which at least has a mention of which book it appears in, its etymology, and the impact it has on popular culture. If no sources can be provided, then this should be deleted. Dimadick (talk) 12:07, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I've quickly developed something of a reputation as a Wikilawyer for Article Inclusionism, yet still I am unsatisfied with this piece. Either substantial new source material needs to be brought forth (from which a major re-write could be produced), or the Article is not worth preserving. --UBI-et-ORBI (talk) 14:12, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• @UBI-et-ORBI:, you've become such an inclusionist that you voted oppose deletion when you are arguing to delete. Which do you mean? Ogress _smash! 23:55, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ogress: haha — sorry about that. I think I got a bit turned-around by the Keep, Comment, Oppose voting format that's been running on this discussion. My vote is in support of Deletion, and I'll adapt my previous note to reflect this. However as I said above, if someone can bring enough new source material to my attention (such that I can see the beginnings of a substantive Article): I have a completely open mind towards adjusting my stance on this piece. Thanks so much for your note here! --UBI-et-ORBI (talk) 04:32, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Abstain pending proper citation provision by Cydevil38. For myself I can attest it is not a hoax, but English sources are sparse. I found it mentioned in Yŏl-gyu Kim (2005). Uncovering the Codes: Fifteen Keywords in Korean Culture. Jain Publishing Company. pp. 161–162. ISBN 978-0-89581-830-0., but the first part of the text is not available for the preview. We could really use more input from Korean speakers on what they find on the Korean internet. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:18, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Cydevil can't answer you because he's been banned for long-term edit-warring (and possibly sockpuppeting) on the topic of Goguryeo Korea and its mythistory, i.e. the same shenanigans he's using ;in this article, which doesn't have a single cite on it. Ogress _smash! 09:02, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ogress: Thanks for tip. As I have a policy of not blaming content for its creator, this doesn't change much for me: I'd still like to see better refs. Now, is there anyone in this discussion who can read Korean, and who can discuss what appears in the Korean web search? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:21, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Oh, Cydevil didn't create the page anyway. Ogress 00:40, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Both ja.wiki (ja:倍達国) and zh.wiki (zh:神市) explicitly states the alternative name Baedalgug/배달국/倍達國 (ja.wiki flat out use that as the primary article name). With that GBooks gives me these Korean-language books (can't say if actual (myt)history or historic fiction or Wikipedia mirror) and some mentions in spme Chinese-language history journals when searching in Chinese characters. I have no access (not to mention can't read Korean) to all of them, so no !vote. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 15:25, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Let's hold on just a few more days: I'm going to leave messages asking three randomly selected, currently active users from Category:User_ko-N for comment: User:Garypark, User:Gershwin0905 and User:Roriromrack. --Slashme (talk) 11:41, 8 September 2015 (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.