Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Order of Accendo


 * 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__. Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Order of Accendo

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

There are practically no sources. The Encyclopedia of Modern Witchcraft and Neo-Paganism that is cited few times is just a generic and pretty short article on Discordianism. Search of reliable sources (Google Books and Scholar) turns up nothing. Викидим (talk) 19:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 20:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Religion.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  20:45, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep, sources are adequate and article was recently restored via RfD. Skyerise (talk) 21:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment is it just me, or is this in effect an edit war in progress that has spilled over into AfD? Jclemens (talk) 23:22, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Don't see how it could be, since the target has been a redirect since 2015 that was just restored today. Unless you are referring to 's nomination of 23 Discordian redirects to RfD on 5 April as edit-warring, in which case, yes. Skyerise (talk) 23:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete: couldn't find a single source even mentioning this, not even the sources cited in the article give a single passing mention as far as I can tell (although I don't have access to the The West Australian article or Cosmic Trigger). Shapeyness (talk) 10:05, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete, perhaps speedily, as a hoax. Like other commentators, I can find no reliable sources whatsoever that so much as mention "Order of Accendo". It seems to be completely made up. Jfire (talk) 21:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete - there is, sadly, a dearth of good, independent, secondary sources on Discordianism-related topics, which has the knock-on effect of making them non-encyclopedic. Psychastes (talk) 18:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete Its been on the cat:nn since time began and not really worked. Fails WP:SIGCOV.   scope_creep Talk  09:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete I was going to suggest redirected to Discordianism until I noticed from the discussion there is a longer history here. The doubts about the verifiability that an "Order of Accendo" exists is convincing enough for me. Ben Azura (talk) 00:14, 26 April 2024 (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.