Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radioactive Friends of the Deep


 * 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. —  Aitias  // discussion 14:05, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Radioactive Friends of the Deep

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

PROD removed with no reason given. A google search for "Radioactive Friends of the Deep" for notability receives absolutely nothing except for these two articles. Very probably hoax. --  Darth Mike  ( join the dark side ) 18:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Also, co-nominating a character from the comic:


 * Speedy Delete ( both all) I reckon it's an attack (comparatively mild, but insidious) on some of the creator's school colleagues. The newspaper does exist, but I can't seem to get their site up http://www.vest.com.mk/ It would be very unlikely for a publication in Macedonian to have characters with names like these in a non-syndicated strip. Quite possible for a non-existent strip. If not attack, certainly hoax anyway. 2 ghits. Guess what they are.... Peridon (talk) 22:10, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I've got into the Vest site now, and can't find this stuff. What's shown under Хумор doesn't seem to include this stuff. That's not to say it's not in the printed copy (Macedonian newspapers aren't easy to get where I live). Peridon (talk) 23:12, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Adding another character from the comic, and an article about its creator:
 * Delete unless sources can be provided to comply with the verifiability policy: this appears to be a hoax. The same applies to the other derivative articles created by the same user. ~ mazca  t 18:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete all per nom. - and any other characters that appear. At best, not notable or verifiable. JohnCD (talk) 18:03, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete All - Not only are there no reliable sources for this, most of the content between the articles are copyvio of the reference given, which is a single blog entry from 2006... - Adolphus (talk) 18:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

...and here is another spin-off article, not even a character, just a "plot-centric item":
 * ... your being jerks and wont let us create legitamet, if not alittle strange, wiki pages!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pokemonmaster319 (talk • contribs) Personal attack removed from comment
 * Comment At least we can spell..... Peridon (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't suppose it's strictly correct to add these extra articles during the debate, but I invoke WP:IAR as they clearly stand or fall with the main article. JohnCD (talk) 23:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete all for lack of notability and verifiability. JohnCD's point is valid, but I agree: if the main article is deleted, all feeder articles on characters should be deleted as a matter of course. The only one I might have an issue with is the creator, but he's been in the nom most of the way. —C.Fred (talk) 23:13, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's the only place I can find him... (The gSuggestion corgi didn't work either.)Peridon (talk) 23:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I agree. I actually edit-conflicted with JohnCD adding the first two extra articles: it's clear that the notability, or lack thereof, of all of these articles is completely intertwined. It saves everyone time in then long run, and seems to be a good use of WP:IAR. ~ mazca  t 12:12, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Or the WP:SNOW subset of IAR, specifically. —C.Fred (talk) 12:53, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete both/all/whichever it is, so long as they go - utterly not notable, at least not by the article. --Alinnisawest,Dalek Empress ( extermination requests here ) 03:56, 16 February 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.