Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JK Reviews


 * 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. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:15, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

JK Reviews

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

This supposed 38 year old magazine is unsourced and gets zero google hits. Google books and google scholar also reveal nothing.  freshacconci  talk talk  10:56, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete likely a hoax. Peter Fleet (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete no reliable sources and content is unverifiable even after Google searching the creators of said magazine (zero Google hits). I would expect that a 38 year old magazine with 125,000 subscribers would at least turn up a few blog results and entertainment sites but yet there was nothing. So I'm suspecting this is a hoax article. AngelOfSadness  talk  12:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 13:40, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 13:40, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems to be completely fictitious Parkerparked (talk) 15:23, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable at best, probable hoax. Edward321 (talk) 00:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Niteshift36 (talk) 05:02, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable and a hoax most likely.Gosox5555 (talk) 14:33, 4 July 2009 (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.