Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Butterfly tent


 * 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. WP:SNOW  MBisanz  talk 05:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Butterfly tent

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article Butterfly tent is suspected to be a hoax.

Originally there were some references in the article, none of which appeared to have any mention of the topic - a request for valid references was posted in late Jan 2009, but none have so far been supplied. The original references were either to commercial sites selling tents or to personal blogs.

The original author appears to be a single-purpose account, whose only edits have either been to this article or to insert references to it in other articles.

The original author objected to but did not provide any reasons for doing so, and has also stated that the subject is so obscure that a basic Google search will not turn up any references.


 * Murray Langton (talk) 07:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - hoax. "First recorded instance of automatic air conditioning." Yeah, right. If they were "conceived during the mid 16th Century", how did they manage to influence the Latin language, as claimed? In any case, if the subject is so obscure that no references can be found, it certainly fails WP:V. JohnCD (talk) 14:13, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:V. (And "the word for tent in Latin is Pavillion, while the word for butterfly in Latin is Patillion" is complete bollocks.) Deor (talk) 14:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * JohnCD makes a good point. (Purported) 16th century inventions are nothing to do with the claimed etymology.  The claimed etymology is wrong, anyway.  The Latin for "butterfly" is in actual fact "papilio".  Whilst we do get words like "pavilion" from that root, that's because they resembled butterflies in their appearance.  "pavilion" can be traced back to the 4th century BCE (the historian Lampridius), long before the 16th century.  A "papilio" wasn't a 16th century Arab merchants' tent.  It was a Roman soldiers' tent, used when on campaign, made of leather, housing 8 soldiers (a "contubernium"), and so-called because it rolled up into a long sausage-shape, and thus, when unrolled and erected, resembled the process of a chrysalis becoming a butterfly. I note that Wikipedia has nothing on the tents of Roman soldiers.  But this isn't a start to remedying that, because none of it is actually right.  Even the title is wrong. Uncle G (talk) 14:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as hoax. Edward321 (talk) 00:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as both non-notable and unverifiable, even in the event that it is true. Anaxial (talk) 23:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete in that I can't find any legitimate history on the butterfly tent, just websites selling them. No references either.  Matt (talk) 03:26, 4 March 2009 (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.