Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bombay obelisks


 * 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.  Jamie S93 ❤ 15:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Bombay obelisks

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested Prod. The article has only one source, a community newsletter. Google picks up little else, except on www.celticnz.co.nz, which is not a reliable source either. GregJackP (talk) 23:19, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - no reliable sources are provided or available. The interpretation given to these rocks in this article is part of Martin Doutré's broader "Ancient Celtic New Zealand" theory, which has not found mainstream support. --Avenue (talk) 00:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions.  —Avenue (talk) 00:16, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - Trivial nonsense. (Talk Contribs) 00:17, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: an article under a similar title was speedily deleted a week or so ago. Here is the log entry.
 * 21:53, 10 March 2010 WereSpielChequers (Talk | contribs) deleted "Bombay standing stones" ‎ (G3: Vandalism: blatant hoax)
 * --Avenue (talk) 00:26, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Don't want to sound mean, but an article about three big rocks should be deleted. And someone should remove the sentance from Bombay Hills. Buggie111 (talk) 00:47, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, lunatic fringe. Editor has a history of creating similar articles.- gadfium 00:49, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Rocks aren't notable unless they have a claim to notability, like Uluru. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Lunatic fringe material as per Avenue and Gadfium. Daveosaurus (talk) 02:03, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Three rocks are not notable. Three rocks linked to fringe theories are not notable. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 05:30, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - loonytoons, like most of this editor's work. andy (talk) 09:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete- per above - SimonLyall (talk) 09:11, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Snowball delete per above, clearly synthesis. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 15:51, 19 March 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.