Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centaurs in antiquity


 * 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. Larry V (talk &#124; contribs) 09:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Centaurs in antiquity

 * — (View AfD)

I'll skip the prod since I'm sure it would be contested. POV fork from Centaurs as acknowledged in the page history. I assume the controversial assertion is that Centaurs actually existed and the article suggests (via non-reliable sources) they still exist today. One section outlines reports of centaurs in antiquity, which can be merged back to Centaurs Aagtbdfoua 03:35, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I should have added, I think this should be deleted Aagtbdfoua 03:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails verifiable sources. My apologies to Wikiproject:Paranormal, but UFO/Paranormal websites are not peer reviewed secondary sources, so do not count as valid sources for wikipedia.  Footnote #1 looks like it may be valid although I'm not familiar with that site, but #2 through #5 are not.  Lacking decent sources, this teeters toward either OR or outright hoax-Markeer 04:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, the suggestion that they existed is POV without valid sources to back up that claim. Merge historical notes back to the main article, though. Quack 688 04:33, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. MER-C 05:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does it really say something to the effect of "There's lots of historical evidence that centaurs existed"? -Amarkov blahedits 06:03, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete hoax! And there's no references to their mermaid cousins.  SkierRMH, 07:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge back to Centaur. It needs a cleanup so as to not leave open the possibilty of centaurs having actually existed, but the sourcing doesn't seem bad enough to be deletion-worthy (one source that got lost in the shuffle is this book excerpt).  The only reason this article isn't just a keep and cleaunp case is that it's a POV fork.  BCoates 10:42, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge back per BCoates. If the information can't survive in Centaur, it probably doesn't need to be here. Tzaquiel 17:03, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Hilarious! No seriously, do whatever. --- RockMFR 00:17, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep it in the interest of the unknown truth. Don't be so arrogant, guys. - UserX
 * Yes, us evil rouge editors, trying to censor "the Truth". "The Truth" still has to be non-biased and verifiable to be included here. -Amarkov blahedits 00:47, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete hoax per WP:V, WP:NPOV, and having a brain in your head. Doczilla 01:54, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge back to Centaur - that is if there is any content worth merging. Peterkingiron 17:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete This definitely is a POV Fork, contrary to the applicable guideline Content forking.  The webpage that is source 1 claims to be notes from a book; Amazon.com's webpage for the book does have a review from Scientific American, and that review even notes that there is some discussion of centaurs in the book.  The book should be a reliable and usable source; but I get the feeling from reading the webpage that it contains just portions of the book's discussion - which leads to questions of what is included.  The other things don't seem to me to be reliable sources; or at least they should be discussed at Centaur, so I wouldn't merge.  GRBerry 03:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - the beastiality section Historical Evidence of Human-Animal Sexual Contacts as I'm afraid school children will find this as they research parts of Harry Potter, then merge a shorter section back to Centaur SweetGodiva 23:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not censored. --- RockMFR 18:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Drivel. Reads like a drunken school essay. Anything worth saying here can be said quite happily in Centaur. WMMartin 20:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:BOLLOCKS. Sandstein 06:23, 21 December 2006 (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.