Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St Thomas Academy, Worcestershire


 * 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   Speedy delete as hoax, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 18:32, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

St Thomas Academy, Worcestershire

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

I have a strong suspicion this is a hoax. I can't find any references to suggest it exists through google. The article claims it is in Worcestershire, yet also claims its 3.4 miles south of Oldbury. The closest Oldbury to Worcestershire is in the West Midlands, and 3.5 miles to the south is still in the West Midlands. Tried to find references to a Stanley Cup relating to cricket in Worcestershire... nothing. I can't believe for one minute that there would be no online mention for something like this if it existed. Jenuk1985 |  Talk  02:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:HOAX. -- The New  Mikemoral  ♪♫ 03:03, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete', looks like a hoax to me. Jezhotwells (talk) 03:12, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Has to be hoax; only things I can find are derived from the article itself; school like this would be easy to find out about.   Chzz  ►  08:58, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Definitely a hoax - the word "inherent" would _not_ appear in a Sun article. :) Tevildo (talk) 09:05, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - hoax. Searches find nothing. 3.4 miles S of Oldbury is not in open country, and not in Worcestershire. "Daily oath of allegiance to the Queen" is ridiculous. The Cabinet Secretary was Sir Burke Trend, not Trent. Etc, etc. I have removed it from List of independent schools in the United Kingdom where the hoaxer added it. JohnCD (talk) 11:49, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Deleted as vandalism (remember that the CSD criterion includes obvious hoaxes), because it's obvious from the comments given above that this is a hoax. Nyttend (talk) 18:03, 15 April 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.