Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roman Standards


 * 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.  Sandstein  18:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Roman Standards

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

Apparent hoax. Creator registered 10 February 2007, received cryptic warning (aparently about another hoax article the same day, can an admin verify?). 11 Feb, created this article. Posted to talk page addressing the issue at 20:37 ("studied the subject for years", etc.). At 21:26 a "Prof.Wilson" registers, posts to the talk page in support of the article at 21:34, then disappears forever. Another editor (see article talk page) found a reference to a god with this name who was a god of military standards, not technical standards. Seems the god might* have existed, but the editor who studied this for years got basic terminology wrong. *Unable to find any reliable sources for this god. Source found by other editor is speculative, at best. Nothing to keep. Maybe Prof.Wilson and/or Val.policelli will explain what I'm missing? Mdsummermsw (talk) 18:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Gee, d'ya think some kid named Ryan may have had something to do with the creation of this article? Google Books and Scholar searches turn up nothing, and plain Google turns up nothing relevant. No reliable sources provided in article or discoverable elsewhere; fails WP:V. Deor (talk) 18:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Actually, my bad PROD guessed someone worked at a company with an agressive beancounter named Ryan. I've now checked the editor's remaining edits: all are related to creating and supporting this page, before disappering with the Professor (Gilligan and the Skipper as well?). - Mdsummermsw (talk) 21:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * In researching this, I came across a humorously classicizing poem about baseball by Eugene Field, in which "Ryanus" is used to refer to Jimmy Ryan, an 1880s outfielder for the Chicago White Stockings. Perhaps this article's author is a fan. Deor (talk) 22:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete deliberate misinformation/hoax. Author claims to have studied source over the course of many years, but cannot cite a single literary source of any kind? The one slim connection to a standard bearer still doesn't work, because getting lucky with a hoax and having it connected to something similar doesn't make it less hoaxy.HatlessAtless (talk) 19:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Unsourced at best, but agree it is likely a hoax that has been here way to long. Beeblbrox (talk) 19:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I found one source that mentioned it possibly (added to page). I found two others that are just mirrors of this page. Leaning towards hoax.  Gtstricky Talk or C 20:39, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The creator's deleted article was pretty similar to this one, describing a Roman god named "Ryanus". As far as the possible source goes (romanofficer.com), they're listed as a designer in South Beach, but they don't list a physical address or a store location.  (That seems odd -- if you're in South Beach, why not open a storefront and get people wandering in to buy jewelry?)  I have a lot of doubts on the authenticity of this article, so I'm going to go with a delete on this one.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 21:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete The *existence* of Ryanus doesn't read like a likely hoax to me. However - I see nothing of value in this article; much of it I suspect is false or misrepresented. Perhaps if at least *one* notable source could be turned up on the topic I'd change my mind. Coanda-1910 (talk) 02:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I get the feeling that this was written by Ryan's girlfriend. Mandsford (talk) 23:22, 13 June 2008 (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.