Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chak Seelong


 * 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 Speedy delete by Nyttend. (non-admin closure) NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:23, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Chak Seelong

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is a blatant hoax from a blatant hoaxer. But apparently not blatant enough to be speedied. Evidence that the article is a hoax: For these reasons, please can we nuke this article ASAP. Bosstopher (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
 * "ညဆီးစ်ကြီးၕ" given as the burmese name of the dish translates to "urine"
 * "ကြီးသုပ်‌" which is meant to literally translate to "sweet chicken" literally translates to "salad"
 * The two burmese sources the article used were removed by burmese speaker User:Phyo WP for being completely unrelated.
 * All google results for "Chak Seelong" are wikipedia related.
 * Jet Tha Jaw on the other hand does some to be a real Burmese dish name (the reason the article failed a speedy). But there are sparse google results and none that establish notability, or contain any of the information included in this article.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk  12:11, 11 April 2015 (UTC)


 * delete agree, appears to be a hoax. Jytdog (talk) 14:41, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:25, 11 April 2015 (UTC)


 * delete Chak Seelong and ညဆီးစ်ကြီးၕ are meaningless in Burmese. I've removed two Burmese sources because they are not about the article. IMO, it is not likely a Burmese dish. The article in Burmese Wikipedia was deleted in June 2014. Phyo  WP    *click           22:23, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy deleted. My deletion rationale was See discussion at WP:Articles for deletion/Chak Seelong; user's created numerous documented hoaxes.  Nyttend (talk) 22:19, 12 April 2015 (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.