Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Branscombeacyloea


 * 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. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:31, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Branscombeacyloea

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to be a hoax. (I'm not G3ing since I believe that should only be used for cases that are obvious at a glance.) It gets precisely 2 GHits – this and the creator's sandbox – and the text appears to be largely copied from Amoeba, which is a hallmark of hoaxes (using a well-known article's structure to make the article look well-formatted and thus evade serious scrutiny).  — PinkAmpers  &#38;  ( Je vous invite à me parler )  06:12, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Delete. per nom--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 15:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Delete: no article on the family (Branscombe is a town), only Ghits for the genus or the discoverer point at Wikipedia, and such a recently discovered genus would be in reputable, online journals. Chris857 (talk) 17:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:18, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:18, 4 April 2013 (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.