Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Center for Computational Astrophysics


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 02:36, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Center for Computational Astrophysics

 * – ( View AfD View log )

More puffery created by Les Golden and his army of sockpuppets. I found some evidence that there is a legitimate organization by this name in Japan, but nothing on the subject of this article and no news stories to use to demonstrate the notability of the Japanese version. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:56, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 22:47, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 22:48, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:41, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - Hoax article. Have not been able to find ANY mention of this alleged institution on Google in Oak Park, Illinois. It does not have a phone number in the local telephone directory, it is not listed with the Oak Park Chamber of Commerce, None of the local institutions of learning make ANY note of it in their websites. In the words of Adam Savage, I'm calling this one "busted". Trusilver  01:30, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. On WP:GNG grounds--all of the hits in Google news and books refer to an organization in Japan, not this place. Could easily be a WP:HOAX. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 01:48, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to belief it is gross exaggeration rather than a deliberate hoax, see this discussion for further context. Beeblebrox (talk) 04:00, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete - probable hoax; for example, while gaming writer Les Golden has been a physics teacher, no such center exists online, and it's likely this is an "in joke" on his ability to "count cards". Bearian (talk) 17:13, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe I'm wrong, but I've gotten the impression from my dealings with Golden and other articles related to him that he actually believes this stuff and it is not a hoax in his view. For example the (now deleted) Near Earth Asteroid Reconnaissance Project actually got a mention in Astronomy (magazine). The fact that this project never went anywhere, no respectable press entity ever mentioned it again, and he was pretty much the only person involved in it didn't seem to bother him. I would say that Golden is a shameless self-promoter with a grossly overinflated sense of the importance of himself and the organizations he has founded, but not an out-and-out hoaxer. This "Center" exists, but is probably just in his garage or a corner of his office. Not that, as the nominator, I don't strongly agree that this article should be deleted, I just don't believe it to be a deliberate hoax. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:22, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * At this point, the semantics of the word 'hoax' seems extraordinarily unimportant to me. I can create the National Institute for the Study of Michael J. Fox's Contributions to Popular Culture in the empty room in my basement I use to store half-empty paint cans tonight, and apparently it isn't a hoax as long as I feel that (in my head) the organization truly exists. In that case, the only difference between that and a hoax is apparently malicious intent, such as using my invented organization to get lend credibility to my own publications... which is exactly what it appears the author is doing. That sound like a hoax to me... or at least enough like to to label it as such. I feel it falls under WP:HOAX, but at the very least it falls under WP:MADEUP. Trusilver  20:19, 28 September 2011 (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.