Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eline Vlasblom


 * 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. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 09:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Eline Vlasblom


Likely non-notable dutch writer. 5 Ghits and Zero hits at Worldcat.com. Delete. Ohconfucius 07:17, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I want to add the above articles to this AfD, which along with Eline Vlasblom all appear to be products of the fertile imagination of user. Some checking on Google reveals that these are the names of actual women, but it looks like (bear in mind I can only read near cognates in Dutch) one of them was Miss Friesland 2005 and the others are Dutch students. Just doesn't seem to be any Google hits for the above names in association with the subjects written about in the articles, eg: Sophie Koelemeij being a "courtesan and spy" during WWI. Tubezone 22:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete I doubt many Dutch authors from those years would be listed at worldcat, but I still have verifiability problems. For all intents and purposes, this book doesn't exist. I can't find it. Vlasblom isn't listed as an author on the Querido (publisher) website and the Dutch Royal Library doesn't seem to have her listed either. Searching for both her name and "Vanitas" her supposed best book on Google yields 2 Wikipedia articles -- nothing more. Same goes for Janneke Sier. In other words, this is unverifiable. I can't even verify the existence of printed sources. - Mgm|(talk) 13:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, no notability likely. Possible attack page? Punkmorten 20:50, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete . Not listed on the dbnl, which has many more recent authors. Paint me cynical, but Janneke Sier, Renske Homans and Sophie Koelemeij by the same editor are odd. Have a look here: this (search for vlasblom). We have a Ms. Vlasblom and Ms. Koelemeij collaborating on a dull academic work. Renske Homans appears to be a student at UVA. More in the same vein, perhaps, at Nadine de Vries. A walled garden of hoaxiness ? Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment The publisher, Querido, does exist. Maybe we should write them and ask if they have ever heard of "Eline Vlasblom". The 1970s and 1980s are a dark age for the Internet. If it does not exist on the web is no proof that it does not exist in print. -- Petri Krohn 15:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The Koninklijke Bibliotheek depot has 109 books published by Querido in 1984, the year that Levend was purportedly published, and 98 in 1977, the year Vanitas should have been handed in. It seems reasonable to assume that all the books published by Querido found their way to the KB those years, but that Ms. Vlasblom's Levend & Vanitas were not among them those or any other years since 1974. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:18, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all Flood this diked polder of hoaxery. Tubezone 00:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment This comment appears on the talk page for Sophie Koelemeij The British 1901 census results are on-line at www.1901census.nationalarchives.gov.uk. The database lists no one with the name Koelemeij Tubezone 22:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I checked the database for all the names. I could not find even possible family members for any of them. The closest match is Ethel Homans, born 1878 in London Clerkenwell (not Manchester), living in St Luke parish in London. She shares the profession of a "Book Folder" with her mother(?) Louisa B. There are no Siers in Manchester and only 184 in the whole of England. There is no Janneke (with any surname), born 1878 in Manchester, or Renske, born 1898 in London. -- Petri Krohn 03:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I bet if the 2000 Netherlands census were public (it's not public after 1938), you'd find all of them. ;-) Tubezone 04:12, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete all. I endorse the deletion of the articles subsequently nominated by Tubezone per extensive research. Ohconfucius 13:07, 27 November 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.