Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aleksandr Vladimirovich Kalenko
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. MBisanz talk 14:19, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Aleksandr Vladimirovich Kalenko (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
The whole story seems to be just a fake. No Russian sources prove that such a poet has ever existed. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 14:54, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete no Google hits for either the Russian or westernised version of the name strongly suggests a hoax. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:02, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I really thought this looked legit so I did some intense research. Not really, that was a joke. Anyway, I googled up all the references to see if I could find a free version online, and guess what? I did! Last reference, "Trotsky, Leon. The Month of The Great Slander. The History of the Russian Revolution; Volume 2,Chapter 27". Found a free version here, quick control-f and there was no Aleksandr Vladmirovich Kalenko, nor any variation of that name. In conclusion: delete! Bsimmons666 (talk) 19:00, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. —Schuym1 (talk) 16:37, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete probable hoax --Dreamspy (talk) 19:51, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Inspired by Bsimmons666's sterling efforts I checked out the first reference, and it doesn't seem to mention this guy [1], and guess what, the second one doesn't either [2]. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, deceptive use of sources, appears very likely to be a hoax. Everyking (talk) 08:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.