Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/E Clampus Vitus

Hi all.

I have to admit, that I am perplexed as to why anyone should see the version of the article I have most recently posted to be a candidate for deletion. Please peruse the facts. It simply corrects basic spelling and grammar mistakes from the article as originally written, and gives a more thorough explanation of what ECV is all about. The content of this most current version and the original are essentially identical, but no one seems to want to delete the original version. Please, please explain. I am happy to have a dialog with anyone who feels that the information as most recently presented is not true. The last several revisions I have made have been rejected, and the original version of the article keeps being put up. Wikipedia in its Introduction states: "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia written collaboratively by many of its readers." I have tried several times to contribute to the discussion. There are many stories concerning the Order, most of which are oral. I understand how someone might find some of them outlandish, so in the most recent version those 'controversial' stories are left out. So mote it be. But please, do not delete the article. Ecvjackass 02:53, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Evidence in support of ECV's history

I would like to present here a few websites that would lend credence to the history of E Clampus Vitus. I have been trying to edit the page, but people are in doubt as to the history of ECV. I hope this helps...

http://www.ecvgazette.com/lostdutchman/ECVhistory.htm

http://www.ecv58.com/history.html

http://www.ecvgazette.com/lostdutchman/KenCastrosHistoryofECV.htm

http://members.aol.com/machngunr1/page5.htm

http://www.ecv5978.com/shistory.htm

http://historytogo.utah.gov/hmancient.html

http://www.historylink.org/_output.cfm?file_id=4164

http://home.infostations.net/vitus/home6.htm

http://www.irjr.com/postoffice/ecvhistory.htm

Happy reading

Ecvjackass 23:59, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)