Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madeira Fortress

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. MBisanz ^talk 02:47, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Madeira Fortress

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

This is one of five articles created recently -Labyrinth City, Ixiamas Fortress, Ruins of Miraflores, Madeira Fortress, Trinchera Fortress and Petroglyphs of Quiaca- all sourced to or based on Yuri Leveratto and his personal website at [yurileveratto.com/]. I can't find reliable sources to show that it meets WP:GNG. I'm taking them to AfD individually as someone might possibly come up with sources even though I've failed. Dougweller (talk) 16:18, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:05, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:05, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 00:11, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now. This sounds like an interim report on archaeological work. That is a variety of WP:OR. When the work is published properly, preferably in a peer-reviewed journal, it may be appropriate to reinstate the article. This also applies to 4 other AFD noms based on the same website. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:37, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It is not an interim report, but was intended to make sure different users could get informations on this important arcjaeological site, almost unknown. Sources are reliable: Atoform is a Brazilian official photographic archive that recognized the archaelogical work. There are other reliable sources of Bolivian and Colombian origin..Franciscos58 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franciscos58 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- CommentAll the sources are to articles written by Yuri Leveratto, who is a fringe author.[1].Dougweller (talk) 15:51, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Article is properly written and sources are reliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archeologo40 (talk • contribs) 20:44, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- Note that Archeologo40 is a WP:SPA whose only edits have been to articles promoting Leveratto or to AfDs involving him. Dougweller (talk) 22:14, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No evidence of notability, all sources are self published -- see WP:SPS. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:22, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No evidence of notability and sources are not reliable.Nickm57 (talk) 11:20, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This link can be added as a peer reviewed journal :
[2]

ThanksCholo50 (talk) 15:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- CommentI don't see this as a peer reviewed journal, and I do see that the article is by our ex-tourist guide with no archaeological qualifications Yuri Leveratto, what a surprise! Why isn't there a real academic report on this? Why are all the sources to the same person? Dougweller (talk) 17:44, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The following editors may be the same person (they all edit the same narrow range of articles and all the IPs geolocate to Bogota Colombia.)

Franciscos58 (talk · contribs)

Cholo50 (talk · contribs)

Archeologo40 (talk · contribs)

190.146.254.220 (talk · contribs)

190.147.16.36 (talk · contribs)

190.146.116.208 (talk · contribs)

190.65.163.106 (talk · contribs)

186.115.57.7 (talk · contribs)

--Guy Macon (talk) 20:29, 28 December 2012 (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.