Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Six families of endor


 * 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 SNOWed as hoax. delete Jclemens (talk) 01:12, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Six families of endor

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Completely unreferenced, possible hoax. A Google search on "Six families of endor" shows only 5 unique results (7 total), none from reliable sources. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:36, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - either HOAX or ESSAY, hard to be sure which. Connection with biblical Witch of Endor appears tenuous. A strict google search for "six families of Endor" returns NO results. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:50, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Seems like a hoax too. Such stuff cannot be included here on Wikipedia. This is an attempt to decrease Wikipedia's integrity. Necromancy and dark magic-related topics cannot be included with no proper reference. It might not make sense to some. This should have been tagged . —> εϻαd ιν  ΤαΙk Ͼδητrιβμτιoης 16:54, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, it was, but another editor removed that tag. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:24, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - There seem to be no references at all. If this is not a hoax (which it seems to be), then it is not notable. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 17:01, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: Wikipedia is not for things made up one day Cusop Dingle (talk) 18:29, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:38, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, possibly speedy, as hoax and thing made up one day. StandFirm (talk) 02:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Yeah... no. Wikipedia is not the place for unverified and original research. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Delete as the subject seems to lack any degree of notability in reliable sources. It is possible that it is a belief of some non-notable or barely-notable group. If that group is notable enough for its own article, the material should be moved there, taking due weight into account. John Carter (talk) 01:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Garbage. Does not look like anything of notability.--Axel™ (talk) 05:27, 24 November 2011 (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.