Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aldo Kapi


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 03:41, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Aldo Kapi

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No reliable sources found anywhere. Article is terribly written and unsourced, orphaned since 10/08. Someone else tried to AFD it but left only a red link, and once again, NOBODY FREAKING NOTICED, LEAVING ME THE ONLY PERSON ON THE WHOLE WIKI WHO CAN TAKE CARE OF REDLINK AFDs. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 16:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Good to see that contributing to the encyclopedia isn't causing you too much distress. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 23:47, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Possible spoof - check reference to 1923 electronic Vako Orchestron and http://www.okapi.it/ Opbeith (talk) 23:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete in the absence of reliable sources, per failure of verifiability and potential spoof. I'm curious: how does one go about finding redlink AfDs other than stumbling for some other reason across an article that has one? —David Eppstein (talk) 05:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —David Eppstein (talk) 05:17, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Obvious delete. It does say in the second line of the article that the subject is a fictitious creation. How odd that the nominator did not notice this. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC).
 * Presumably not noticed because of the diversion of this serious editor's attention elsewhere. Too much serious time and energy is wasted on Wikipedia dealing with proposed deletions and criticisms of imperfect serious articles. Opbeith (talk) 12:36, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fictitious character. -- Radagast3 (talk) 06:39, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as failing WP:V; possible hoax. Nsk92 (talk) 13:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.