Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Domonkos II, Archbishop of Esztergom


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  14:26, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Domonkos II, Archbishop of Esztergom

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Non-existing person, only a 14th-century forgery mentions his name. Modern academic works (archontologies) do not list his name among the archbishops. His name is not included in the provided source Beke, Margit (2003). I created the article 10 years ago based on Hungarian wiki article. There, another delete request is ongoing. Norden1990 (talk) 13:14, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Religion,  and Hungary. Norden1990 (talk) 13:14, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:25, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment -- We are dealing with a very remote period. Are we absolutely sure that the 14th-century source is a forgery?  Does the Hungarian WP article still exist?  Sometimes, it is worth having an article on a person whose existence is dubious, as a place to express that doubt.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:54, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The article does exist as of 19:47, 30 April 2023 (UTC). Alfa-ketosav (talk) 19:47, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, the source is a forgery. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 03:30, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete under G7: article author is requesting deletion and there is no substantial content added by other editors. I've looked over the hu.wiki discussion (via Google Translate) and it appears that competent people have done a thorough search for sources and found nothing. I'm prepared to take the nom's word for it that this person is non-existent and non-notable. Sojourner in the earth (talk) 11:38, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - if the topic does not pass WP:V then the correct outcome should always be deletion. Please ping me if appropriate verification exists in either the Hungarian Wikipedia discussion or this one. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:45, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: a non-existent person Pallor (talk) 07:18, 4 May 2023 (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.