Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coat of arms of Sealand

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 and redirect. - Mailer Diablo 15:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of arms of Sealand and Flag of Sealand

Both are unreferenced and trivia. We have an article on the Principality of Sealand, which is an old fort off the coast of England that claims to be a separate nation, but I really don't see the point in having separate articles for their flag, coat of arms, anthem, et cetera. An earlier precedent of a related article was to merge here, but this resulted in an edit war [1], so deletion may be more appropriate. >Radiant< 12:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't get it. It's a micronation, it is not even recognized by any country. The population of Sealand never exceeds more than 10 people according to the article. The fact that they even have an article at all is astounding to me. Put all relevant information there. It sure doesn't deserve more than one page. The coat of arms and flag are already in the main article, let's delete the redundancy. --Cyrus Andiron 12:53, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No separate notability for these flags and emblems. I would opt for merge except, as Cyrus Andiron says, they're already in the main articles. --Dweller 13:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Merge both~~ into Principality of Sealand. It seems that there is an article name rule of "Coat of arms XX" and "Flags of XX" (see the templates), so keep the name, but merge in a single article. Cate |_Talk 13:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oops. It should be Redirect both, because I think the two article names should be keep, as a name convention (defined by use but NOT in in WP:NC). Cate |_Talk 13:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Alternatively we could fix that template. >Radiant< 13:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - No need. Template:Sealand table is transcluded in exactly one article. The easiest approach is to subst and delete it, and then remove the superfluous links. --kingboyk 14:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC) Template nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_9#Template:Sealand_table. --kingboyk 14:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - For template, I mean Template:Nationalflags and linked articles. Anyway my concern are not about templates, but about name conventions (and template provide the list of such use). Cate |_Talk 14:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - OK. I think that template can be fixed up, and I don't believe non-recognised nations should be in it anyway. --kingboyk 15:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and User:Cyrus Andiron. Sealand or it's owner is notable, I'm quite sure of that, but there's absolutely no need or justification for these seperate articles. At one line each there's also nothing to merge. --kingboyk 14:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect both per Cate, separate articles are clearly not viable. PubliusFL 14:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disclosure: I had earlier removed an external link from the main Sealand article, about the flag and coat of arms, because of the existence of these 2 articles. If these articles are deleted (or replaced with redirects), the external link may be a candidate for adding back to the main article. --kingboyk 14:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect, better covered in the main article, and treating fake micronations like real countries sets a dangerous precedent. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:56, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect both to Principality of Sealand. Content is already in the main article, and for an unrecognized micronation, there is no need nor notability for the coat of arms or the flag to have standalone articles, regardless of our convention for coats-of-arms and flags of real nations whose insignias get covered in reliable sources. Barno 15:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I would support the outcome of this debate being used as a precedent for redirection of flag articles and coat-of-arms articles for all micronations notable enough for their main article to be kept in Wikipedia. Barno 15:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- That sounds reasonable. They tend to be borderline self-promotion, anyway. >Radiant< 15:40, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would support that as well. --Cyrus Andiron 15:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. If Sealand doesn't rate separate articles for its symbols, probably no one does. Maybe Seborga (speculating), but that would be the exception that proves the rule, as if there's enough information to write an independent article about Seborgan arms it's probably relevant to the municipality as well as the micronation. PubliusFL 22:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence of notability in the instance of a handful of people who fool only themselves by calling themselves a "nation" and then creating a flag. Edison 16:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no redirect is needed; who is going to look for Sealand by typing in "coat of arms of Sealand", or "flag of Sealand"; would we have redirects if someone hadn't created this soon to be deleted articles any way. Maybe we need restrooms of Sealand, culture of Sealand, demographics of Sealand, ethnic groups of Sealand, films shot in Sealand, ad nauseum as more redirects to fit someone's all-inclusive Wikipedia of Sealand. NOT! Carlossuarez46 21:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Good point. I'd be fine with a plain delete rather than redirect. PubliusFL 22:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - While lists of these things are arguably worthwhile, separate articles on a micronation by micronation basis are silly. Georgewilliamherbert 22:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both - Burden is on the authors to prove there is anything notable about these not coverable in Sealand. Carlossuarez46 gives a cogent argument against redirect. - Aagtbdfoua 23:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and merge the information into the Principality of Sealand of article. Dorange 00:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both unsourced trivia. The flag and "coat-of-arms" already appear in the main Sealand article. - fchd 19:14, 10 May 2007 (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.