Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blug


 * 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) 00:25, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Blug

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unreferenced content. This may be a hoax or original research, but because I couldn't tell if it was a hoax or religious content I was unaware of, I decided to go with WP:AFD instead of WP:CSD. Either way, it seems inappropriate for inclusion, as I can find no sources for this information. Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 15:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Obvious hoax. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 15:49, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. If, per WP:AGF, this is a genuine find in some dig somewhere, great - when they write it up in a scholarly journal, or when there is media coverage of the find, we can have an article - which means that this is premature and should be deleted. If it's not, then it's a Hoax and should be deleted. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 15:51, 22 January 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.