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 the country, delete the song. east.718 at 09:42, 11/4/2007

Sackalia[edit]

Bundled with this nomination is also:

Deletion Nomination Possible hoax article. Bears striking resemblence to another probably Estonian related hoax "Principality of Estland", see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Principality of Estland. Some of the problems: 1) Google search turns up SQUADOOSH, except this article and its mirrors. 2) The article is unreferenced. 3) The only external link is to a website for a college fraternity site. The article on the national anthem, with Guitar Chords? (odd for an anthem for a from the 11th century???)Both articles have tingled my spidey-sense. I am not 100% convinced these are hoaxes, but given the problems with other Estonian history articles, I thought it prudent to bring these up for discussion. Jayron32|talk|contribs 02:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, but move to Sakala (county). Sackalia is a Latin name for ancient Sakala county, see Scholar, Books, for example here. Delete the anthem, though. Might be a hoax, but is non-notable and doesn't belong to Wikipedia in any case. -- Sander Säde 03:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sackalia per Sander Säde--Termer 04:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the article needs to be renamed and cleaned up, I'll take care of it right now.--Termer 04:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The Anthem of Sackalia, again per Sander Säde--Termer 04:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like the bundling. It's confusing. The first needs to be kept, at least the title is legit. Anthem is a total hoax tho and needs to be deleted.--Alexia Death the Grey 07:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment please note that independent eldership in any related article and any ref to a folk song from is nonsense and would need to go. Just pointing it out because User:Victor_falk has restored the things in the article after I cleaned up everything that was questionable. Nobody has ever called the political structure of these counties anything like an independent eldership. There is more to the restored things but I'll remove these later and replace with refd facts as time permits. For now I just added the clean up tag. Thanks--Termer 07:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I confused the before and after versions which each other; I self-reverted my edits a couple of times when editing the infobox, and it looks like I lost track of which was which. Sorry for the confusion--victor falk 13:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The anthem article comes with series of redirects that must go with the article. Sakala hümn, Sakala ylemlaal, Anthem of Sakala.--Alexia Death the Grey 07:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, According to my copy of History of Estonia, 2nd Ed., by Tõnu Tannberg, et al. ISBN 9985206061, on page 31 is discussed the ancient eldership of Sakala that existed in the 13th Century as described by Henry of Livonia. Note the authors of this book call these administrative divisons as "regions", rather than "counties". Also, while the book doesn't explicitly state they were "independent elderships" it does state: "By the end of the Ancient Times, some notable tendencies of co-operation between regions indicate the development of elements of statehood. According to the Chronicles of Henry of Livonia, even annual joint consultations of county elders were supposedly held in Raikküla". To me this implies they were independant. Martintg 10:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Martintg Re: @ Talk:Sakala_County--Termer 16:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The Anthem of Sackalia, probable hoax. Martintg 11:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sackalia, abstain on the anthem.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 16:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I made the bundled nomination because it appeared BOTH articles were hoaxes, ala "principality of Estland". Based on the discussion here, and the addition of the references, I would Withdraw Nomination for the province/county/whatever article on Sakala/Sackalia and still maintain the nomination for the Anthem. The bundling was done in good faith, as I did do due diligence on the name Sackalia, and found nothing at all save Wikipedia mirrors, and so both looked like part of the same hoax. It appears that others with access to print sources I did not have access to have removed the hoax-y aspect of the Province article, including a good move to the more proper name. However, the anthem article still has to go, in my opinion. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 02:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is a good catch... will be a while before all these hoax articles are fully fixed/gone. All of them have a grain of truth, but they use obscure sources and spellings, are very WP:POINTy etc. Like I've said before, we should have a discussion about suspected User:Bloomfield hoaxes in WikiProject Estonia - ie list probable hoaxes there to see if AfD is needed. -- Sander Säde 04:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jayron32, I think since the article has now been moved to Sakala County and kept, Sackalia is now a redirect which should be now deleted, because as you say, there is nothing found for the name "Sackalia". So I would support deletion of the redirect Sackalia and the anthem. Martintg 23:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect should be kept, see Special:Whatlinkshere/Sackalia. -- Sander Säde 04:27, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, indeed you are correct. Martintg 19:22, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep both unless someone can verify they are hoaxes. Really. Greswik 18:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sackalia has been fixed already, moved to its real name - and I don't think anyone wants it to be deleted. Please read the previous discussion first. -- Sander Säde 21:14, 3 November 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.