Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carron Clementina (2nd nomination)


 * 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. ✗ plicit  23:47, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Carron Clementina
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

Likely hoax; this article was created along with Carron Giovanni in 2003 by an IP editor. Google pulls up unrelated results; I found this but don't know if it is related to the person in question: https://www.libreriauniversitaria.it/clementina-carron-briancon-ultima-san/libro/9788881701292 wizzito &#124; say hello!  22:00, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. wizzito  &#124; say hello!  22:00, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. wizzito  &#124; say hello!  22:00, 22 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete No hint of notability, even if the case it were not a hoax.--Phso2 (talk) 22:17, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Nothing to be found, I support deletion as a likely hoax. Also, noting that this may be both the oldest and longest lasting hoax article ever, closely followed by Giovanni Carron. Suggest that the closing administrator consider listing on WP:HOAXLISTJackattack1597 (talk) 15:14, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:06, 23 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete This is a premer example of everything that is wrong with Wikipedia. That this article has stood for 18 years is crazy, and example why Wikipedia never needs to have anything at all approaching a grandfather clause. This is a prime example why we need to start requireing that all articles be sourced to reliable sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:25, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment even scarier this article was previously kept. One of the reason for keeping it was that the Order of the Sacred Heart is notable. However even if we could estyablish her as a donor of all her goods to the Order of the Sacred Heart, that is not a sign of notability. I just bang my head at the backwardness of the last discussion.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:27, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment If this is a hoax, which it seems almost certain to be, it has existed for 18 years, 4 months and some days. That is about 4 years longer than the previous hox record holder.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:33, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment This is very probably not a hoax, since there are existing sources, only a case of non-notability--Phso2 (talk) 20:31, 23 June 2021 (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.