Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eiiris, K. Kagami


 * 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 as a hoax. I have indefinitely blocked, and  for disruptive meat- or sockpuppetry. Sandstein (talk) 09:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Eiiris, K. Kagami

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Near as I can tell, this is a hoax. I can find no mention of this person on Google, despite her impressive accomplishments. The only reachable source is in Japanese, and a translation doesn't show her name in the article anywhere. TheMile (talk) 14:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Agree with, could not find any sources at all. Cirt (talk) 18:00, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.   —David Eppstein (talk) 00:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Agree with the nomination. Could not find any sources mentioning her anywhere. Google search produces nothing on this person. Similarly, a search at the École Normale Supérieure website, where she is supposedly a postdoc, produces nothing either . A search at MIT website where she was supposedly a student also produces zero results. Looks like a hoax article. Nsk92 (talk) 02:24, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Look-up my contributions by clicking at the link above. You will see that I have been an editor since August 2007 and have well over 500 edits on multiple topics.Nsk92 (talk) 12:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Have removed the SPA tag on you, you've been here nearly since mid 2007.-- Phoenix -  wiki  13:11, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. I have presented my case under the discussion tab in the article regarding translation and where I have provided information how additional sources may be found on top of what is given. The quality of inquiry put into this case has been unsatisfactory in my opinion; as evidentiated from the messages in agreement of the nominator, only quick searches in English have been made - if results could've materialized on a quick search, I will not have gone through the trouble of painstaking collation. The nominator has also employed hasty claims on his educational status, an irrelevant and unproven premise as part of his claim. I have also falsified his error of equivocation and shown his lack of understanding in the field under the discussion tab; I recommend looking into his reliability. I also note a lack of inquiry standards in the search on the MIT site; I do not recall MIT publicizing its class rolls, nor do academicians practise the use of first name (note, the subject in concern follows Japanese naming convention) in publications - in fact, this is often abbreviated. The members of the inquiry have not displayed reliability in their understanding of the inner workings in this field. However, I must accept that the claim on École Normale Supérieure might have been a hasty mistake on my part - I remember it was one of the Grandes écoles, but cannot ascertain if it was ENS, École centrale Paris, or whichever. Thanks. Melissagoethe (talk) 06:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC) — Melissagoethe (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Regarding MIT. They even have a special "People" search tab which allows to look for the names of all people affiliated with the university, including students. Here is am example:. Moreover, many students have their personal webpages, again, see example here. The MIT main search produces nothing for "Eiiris". It gives some hits for "Kagami", but none are about her. In general, the burden of proof, per WP:V, is on you to produce positive and verifiable evidence of the subject's existence and notability. At the moment you have done neither. Nsk92 (talk) 11:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. "This article is about a "child prodigy", not a "world-reknowned scientist". It is therefore not unexpected that one could not easily obtain articles written by the subject of the Wiki entry. Also, while overly elaborate with his verbosity at times, the author of the article did mention, quite reasonably, that if information on Ms. Eiiris is readily available throughout the 'net he would not have found the need to post the information here. The ambiguity of the source could be heavily disputed due to it being Japanese, but let's get a fluent or established translator to verify the source before deleting the article. Afterall, lets practice a bit of WikiLove, shall we? A community-driven encyclopedia should have more room for the benefit of doubt for fellow contributors. Linlikai (talk) 07:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)  — Linlikai (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment I would submit that a child prodigy with these accomplishments would gather significantly more media attention than the typical string theorist. TheMile (talk) 12:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. 2 Google hits, both of which are to Wikipedia.  Hoax. KleenupKrew (talk) 10:20, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Agree with . This is definitely not a hoax. The sources may be scarce, as she is not widely-known, but I have seen the professor in person, and she is a modest person (it is not unexpected that people know little about her),very young, very intelligent. I think she deserves this feature in recognition of her prodigious feats. I can testify that she has taught topology, and once gave a talk on ultracold atoms at a university faculty. I have even attended the said lecture during my internship at CERN... However, although I heard that she had completed her doctoral thesis, I am not certain if she is at École Normale Supérieur at the moment. Here, I believe that  met Wikipedia's ethical code for being honest about the truthfulness of this part of her article. LoneWolfSHYBOY (talk) 10:41, 26 April 2008 (UTC) — LoneWolfSHYBOY (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * What you or anybody else have heard somewhere does not count. The principal policy on Wikipedia is verifiability, WP:V. You must provide verifiable evidence that the subject exists and is notable. Otherwise the article has no business being on Wikipedia. Nsk92 (talk) 11:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment My delete vote, posted yesterday, had been REMOVED by User:Linlikai. Here is the diff to prove it. Such behaviour is absolutely unacceptable! If you have something to say, say it here, and provide comments below other people's votes. But you have absolutely no right to remove other people's votes. I am reposting my original vote, with the original time-stamp, below. Nsk92 (talk) 10:54, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I am sorry to know that vote had been deleted under a discussion of my article. As I had replied to your post in my original post, I have relocated it above mine. Melissagoethe (talk) 11:50, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Challenge: Credence of User:Nsk92 I just also noted those who have come to my defense had been given SPA tags which I fairly preserved, but that User:Nsk92 has removed SPA tags against his favour. He has earlier mentioned that "[such] behaviour is absolutely unacceptable!". I will like to challenge his case on the basis that he has practised hypocrisy! Melissagoethe (talk) 12:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC) Edit: As per his standards, I have reset the tags.
 * Now, that is rich! First of all, it was not me who removed the SPA tag that you placed on my comment but rather User:KleenupKrew, here is the diff. Second, you have got some nerve accusing me of being an SPA. Anyone can look-up my contributions here. I have been a registered user since August 2007 and have over 500 edits on multiple topics. What about you?? Nsk92 (talk) 12:31, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * A cursory look at Nsk92's contributions shows that a SPA tag for him is absurd. TheMile (talk) 13:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment I'd like to point out that the only keep votes (from Linlikai, Melissagoethe, and LoneWolfSHYBOY) are from brand new accounts that have only contributed to articles concerning Ms. Eiiris, and as such are very likely meat/sockpuppets. I also find it suspicious how brand new users are showing such a thorough grasp of Wikipedia bureaucracy.  TheMile (talk) 12:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree, it's been taken to ANI. They look like sockpuppets to me.-- Phoenix -  wiki  13:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The AN/I discussion is here. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 20:30, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.   —TangentCube, Dialogues 12:49, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Very strong delete it looks like a hoax, though there was the possiblity that it wasn't. The above SPAs have proved beyond all doubt that this is a hoax.-- Phoenix -  wiki  13:09, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Definite hoax. Not a single hit in Google Scholar, not even as a citation in another article. You don't get to be a physics postdoc at the ENS without a single verifiable publication in an international journal. Hqb (talk) 13:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete You can't trust the translator programs on Japanese names, so I went through the 2003 results manually. In my opinion, none of those names could plausibly be read as Eiirisu Kagami.Kww (talk) 13:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete hoax - no real sources exist - this looks like an attempt by a student to puff themselves up. --87.115.8.27 (talk) 14:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - Hoax or not, I can't find any "accomplishments" mentioned in the article. EraserGirl (talk) 14:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete ISI turns up no hits for the author Kagami EK, can't verify claims that she started publishing at age 14. Pete.Hurd (talk) 14:30, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Right, it looks like Linlikai, Melissagoethe, and LoneWolfSHYBOY are sockpuppets or meat puppets. An arbitration comitee ruling states that "For the purpose of dispute resolution when there is uncertainty whether a party is one user with sockpuppets or several users with similar editing habits they may be treated as one user with sockpuppets." So the three above users are to be treated as one user with sockpuppets. Linlikai has removed others comments saying this article should be deleted and Melissagoethe has added spa tags to the comments of a user who clearly isn't a single purpose account, but who happens to disagree with him.-- Phoenix -  wiki  13:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Drive a stake through its heart and bury it under a crossroads'. The article tells us:  With a measured IQ of 174, she holds membership at various IQ societies, and is the youngest in history to hold the position of Provost of Natural Sciences in the Binary-Computable Deconstruction Society, an invitation-only high IQ society that operates within the World Intelligence Network .  Note how the ludicrously named "Binary Computable Deconstruction Society" is merely a link to high IQ society, in which it's not mentioned. And further:  Kagami is the youngest gold medalist in the Japan Mathematical Olympiad to date, emerging as one of the top scorers at Japan’s Spring Mathematical Training Camp national team selection for the International Mathematical Olympiad 2003.  Really? Then she wasn't close enough to the top to be chosen, as her name doesn't appear in that page. Enough already? -- Hoary (talk) 15:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Disturbingly similat to a hoax article on Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Ishahwright: claims of incredibly high IQ at low ages, membership at various IQ societies, and remarkable achievements that should be splashed everywhere including Guiness Book of Records, but they don't give a single hit on google --Enric Naval (talk) 16:34, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Unsourced; possibility of a hoax. A child prodigy who earned a Ph.D at MIT at age 16 would certainly be covered in American news media; there is nothing. EdJohnston (talk) 18:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - the prosecution's evidence is convincing, the defence's behaviour is confirmation. JohnCD (talk) 19:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Perhaps enough, but still. -- Taku (talk) 20:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Delete per nom. This is clearly a hoax and if not the American Media certainly has become lax. Rgoodermote  20:51, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete but if reliable sources that clearly establish the controversial facts in the article turn up it's ok to recreate the article. Fg2 (talk) 04:14, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Meteorological alert. Could this be a snowstorm? -- Hoary (talk) 06:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The only keep votes are from two socks and from the article creator, and their reasoning is backed with no policy, so this is a clear "no consensus" :D --Enric Naval (talk) 22:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete No Eiiris exists on WorldCat, and the Kagami who wrote mathematics in Japanese is Tetsuo Kagami. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:13, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Clearly a hoax.  Is it snowing yet? Edward321 (talk) 02:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I have been unable to find ay paper by any Eiiris in arXiv. I doubt very much if someone would be a postdoc in a notable intstitute of higher education without having their name on at least one paper. DGG (talk) 03:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete hoax. And block socks. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 16:22, 29 April 2008 (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.