Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The church of mundallah


 * 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, probable hoax. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 20:41, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

The church of mundallah
Even if not a hoax, the article asserts that this church has only 50 members -- nonnotable. NawlinWiki 21:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:V. Likely hoax. Not a single google hit. Fan-1967 21:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete agreed, likely WP:HOAX and/or non-notable. Not a single reliable source for any of the claims, so fundamentally unverifiable. Gwernol 21:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Do Not Delete The church has been briefly mentioned on newscasts locally (northern IL/southwest WI) for its disruption of seemingly "normal" fundraisers/food drives. However, other than that, I have not been able to find anything. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.190.125.140 (talk • contribs).
 * Comment Yet, they don't appear in a single online news source, even these days when just about every local paper and TV station has a website. Odd. Please review the policies on Verifiability by Reliable Sources. -- Fan-1967 22:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete as unverifiable at best. --Metropolitan90 03:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per CSD G3 and/or CSD A7 This is an obvious hoax and therefore falls under CSD G3. Even if it does not fall under CSD G3, it can be speedied as a non-notable club (CSD A7). Jesse Viviano 01:57, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Hoax is not a speedy category, and is not the same thing as vandalism. Fan-1967 01:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with Fan-1967: this is not pure vandalism under the criteria for speedy deletion. The CSD:A7 (no assertion of notability) claim is closer, but the article does make a weak claim of notability. I've removed both speedy notices. Let the AfD process run to its completion. Gwernol 02:08, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * According to the list of non-criteria for speedy deletion, obvious hoaxes count as vandalism. Remotely plausible ones do not qualify, though. I thought that this one was not plausible at all, so I nominated it for speedy deletion as vandalism. Jesse Viviano 02:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry. It's remotely plausible. It's conceivable that such a group could exist, though unlikely in the extreme. Give it a few days, and it'll get deleted in the normal course of things. Par for the course with these fake religions. Fan-1967 02:18, 18 July 2006 (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.