Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gillis Baronets


 * 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. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-04 09:19Z 

Closing notes

There is some serious hoaxing going on here, perhaps by Duiek, or by Gillis himself.

Facts:
 * User:Duiek said he is the same user as User:71.232.30.194, so I'll just refer to both as Duiek.
 * Duiek created the biography article for J.R. Gillis.
 * Duiek says he created this garden after he met J.R. Gillis, who told him his family history.
 * Duiek later says he has asked a friend and the friend says he has the book and has sent him scans of the book. So Duiek was working based on what Gillis had told him, before that.
 * When the forgery was found out by User:Proteus, User:Kittybrewster, and User:AlexTiefling (good work), Duiek later says he checked the book in the library and agrees the scan is fake.

It's possible that:
 * 1) Duiek is Gillis and lied.
 * 2) Duiek is not Gillis and Duiek is telling the truth.  Gillis lied to Duiek.
 * 3) Duiek is not Gillis but Duiek lied about having been told about the Gillis family by Gillis himself.

As far as I can tell, Gillis is indeed family name with a long history rooted in Scotland. Houseofnames.com sells Gillis family plaques and such. There's a book called Gillis Family in the South by Clayton Metcalf. There's even a whole web forum dedicated to Gillis geneaology. I'm sure they'd know about this baronetcy already if it weren't a hoax.

In the real world:
 * W.M. Gulliksen Mfg. Co., Inc. is real, and J.R. Gillis is the owner and CEO of the company. I assume Gillis is a respectable person and wouldn't create a hoax like this.
 * I would like to assume good faith of Duiek. However, he is implicitly accusing Gillis himself of lying, a serious charge.  We should assume good faith of Duiek, but on the other hand Duiek is a pseudonymous person and Gillis is a known semi-public figure, and we should also assume good faith of Gillis.
 * Gillis has been quoted in press, e.g.
 * "Nowadays you can do a search on the Internet and you can find everything, but you have found nothing, because everybody is just as good as everybody else," said J.R. Gillis, president of W.M. Gulliksen Manufacturing Co. Inc., a plastic injection molding company based in Boston. "How would you know who to talk to out of the hundreds or thousands of results returned by the search?" added Gillis.
 * Therefore, J.R. Gillis cares about what people find when they search for his name on the Internet. If Gillis himself is not the one creating the hoax, he might be interested in knowing about this incident.  The contact information for his company is available on the Internet: 187 Gardner St., West Roxbury MA 02132, United States (617)323-5750, (617)323-3784 fax, and also in the whois records for gulliksen.com.

Gillis Baronets, Sir Alexander Gillis, 3rd Baronet
Note: I am merging the AFDs for Gillis Baronets, Sir Alexander Gillis, 3rd Baronet. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-04 08:32Z 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)
 * —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-04 08:33Z 
 * —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-04 08:33Z 

'''This section was originally for Gillis Baronets only. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-04 08:32Z  ''' DELETE
 * Speedy delete. Fictional baronetcy. Linked to Baronets who are also fictional. Also linked to vanity page of not-notable person which will soon join afd.- Kittybrewster 01:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: This is not a genealogy service.  Seicer  (talk) (contribs) 17:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, totally unreferenced and sincerely to no interest to anybody who would not prefer a genealogy site over wikipedia Alf Photoman  22:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If fictional, why are we arguing ? Speedy delete -- Simon Cursitor
 * Delete - If it was genuine I would be arguing strong keep, it is not however.--Couter-revolutionary 09:46, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete- per above Astrotrain 11:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'd like to point out that there seems to be some evidence this is not fictional, as discussed here with reference to . This alone does not make the baronetcy notable, but seems at least to indicate its existance. If this book is somehow fictional as seemingly discussed here, then someone needs to explain the situation in greater depth.--Jackyd101 14:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - The photocopy page used as evidence is obviously forged. It claims that the baronetcy was created by Queen Anne in 1687 - when her father was still on the throne! The dates are clearly adapted from the entry above. "Of Menstrie" is a handle applying to the Holburne family. The thing is a pure cut-and-paste job. AlexTiefling 15:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

'''The next section of comments was originally for Sir Alexander Gillis, 3rd Baronet only. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-04 08:32Z  '''

DELETE
 * Fictional baronetcy. Linked to Baronets who also appear fictional. Also linked to vanity page of not-notable person which will soon join afd.- Kittybrewster 01:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 15:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per Kittybrewster. But if he is in the big book of baronets like all the others, what makes this more fictional than some other dude who bought or inherited a title? If a person who does not exist gets into the book, then is it not a reliable source? Edison 16:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * He is not in the book. - Kittybrewster 16:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and per WP:DiscourageVanity Alf Photoman  22:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Hoaxalicious. ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 00:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - baronetcy was allegedly created by Queen Anne in 1687, several years before she ascended the throne. The only supplied source document is a crude forgery. (See the various related talk pages.) AlexTiefling 15:47, 1 March 2007 (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.