Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antiochus Gelotopoios


 * 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. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 22:22, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Antiochus Gelotopoios

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This seems made-up and should be deleted unless someone can verify that this person actually existed. Another editor,, flagged this as a likely hoax but the G3 speedy was declined. DanCherek (talk) 22:09, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Military. DanCherek (talk) 22:09, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cyprus-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete; It does not look liken that Antiochus Gelotopoios ever existed and has ZERO coverage from reliable sources. Every source I've found copies the exact opening of the article, and it's very likely that user-generated sources simply copied the material from here.  Invading Invader  (userpage, talk) 22:40, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Moreover, I checked one of the sources (Conquest and Empire); there is no mention of Antiochus anywhere in such book, much less on that page  Invading Invader  (userpage, talk) 22:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. The cited sources don't mention such a person, and my searches didn't find any evidence at all of his existence. Since a prominent historical figure of this sort would be discussed in a wide variety of sources, this is clearly a hoax. (For extra credit, "Gelotopoios" apparently means "jester", another indication that this is a joke/hoax article.) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:41, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: Convinced this is a hoax judging by the creator's username also being Antiochus. Curbon7 (talk) 01:55, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It may also be worthwhile also contacting our friends at Indonesian Wikipedia (User:Bennylin?), as this hoax article exists there as well . Curbon7 (talk) 02:03, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the ping. I will get back to you shortly after checking the source. Bennylin (talk) 03:45, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Deleted in id.wp Bennylin (talk) 05:58, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete, sources linked to the Internet Archive in the article do not actually contain this name at all (nor does the Internet Archive as a whole). BD2412  T 05:03, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * This should serve as a reminder to us all to check the actual sources' context.  Invading Invader  (userpage, talk) 05:23, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not mentioned in the sources cited. That Heckel's comprehensive Who's Who in the Age of Alexander the Great does not mention him is not a good sign – it has entries for much less well attested figures than Antiochus Gelotopoios allegedly is.  Looking at the ancient sources, the most damning is the supposed mention in Herodotus, who died 70 years before Antiochus was allegedly born, while Athenaeus 12 doesn't mention spices from Sri Lanka or Antiochus.  This has every appearance of being a hoax. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 08:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete I am being weary of this deletion. Since there is a chance that this person does actually exists. But, it deosn't remove the fact that this man is not notable. I've searched the internet about him, yet I can't find any proofs of his existence. May be as well a fictional character. Pl or ek y Have a problem? 07:46, 29 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete, This person never existed - the article is a hoax. I won’t go into unnecessary detail about how this fact came to my attention 5 years after the article’s creation, but the evidence could almost not be more obvious. Every single source cited in the References section does not mention the subject at all. Every chapter and line of the texts cited, from the Arrian to the Plutarch, also does not mention the subject in any capacity whatsoever. As has already been stated, the assertions in the article concerning Herodotus are impossible, as he had died decades before the subject was born. The apparent name of the subject is ‘Jester’. Without intending to speculate too excessively, I would note that this appears most likely to be a bad faith entry, by an individual with a surface level knowledge (albeit in this case one sufficient for their purposes) of the period, in order to validate a not infrequent idea about the fickle reliability of a publicly maintained encyclopaedia - a goal continuously achieved for some 5 years now. A humanist myself, I would propose no longer. Xerxesxerxesxerxes333 (talk) 13:32, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete for all the reasons above and because "Gelotopoios" is Greek for "jester". 68.189.242.116 (talk) 20:38, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete as hoax. Xerxesxerxesxerxes333 said it. Srnec (talk) 00:44, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: It's time for this page to go, let it WP:SNOW, let it snow... Mako001 (C) (T)  🇺🇦 12:35, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Devoke  water  11:47, 3 November 2022 (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.