Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pliny the Elder conspiracy


 * 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. James086 Talk &#124; Email 06:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Pliny the Elder conspiracy

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Without independent references for this theory, it looks like a case of WP:NOT and WP:OR. Prod removed by anonymous user without comment. Marasmusine (talk) 23:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. per nom. Especialy the fact that the only given source is the original text, makes it very ORlike. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I know I've seen speculation about this, but it doesn't seem especially notable as an article. If anything sourceable exists it should probably be mentioned in the Pliny the Elder article. --Dhartung | Talk 00:34, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Carter | Talk to me 04:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - This article is totally unecyclopedic. Masterpiece2000 (talk) 12:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete OR conspiracism. --Folantin (talk) 14:30, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Very entertaining, but could it not just have been prodded? --Paularblaster (talk) 20:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as clear case of original research. Cosmo0 (talk) 21:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Peter Fleet (talk) 03:54, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Original research and shakier than the average conspiracy theory. Edward321 02:38, 1 December 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.