Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kieferism

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 per CSD#G3. Wikipedia isn't a place for completely unverifiable "religions" made up last week. You don't have to do even a "gentle stretching of WP:CSD#G3" to apply this to such a blatant nonsense page creation.--Isotope23 ^talk 16:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kieferism

Hoax. PRODded by another editor, PROD removed with no reasoning given. No GHits to reliable sources. Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 11:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete Obvious hoax.Alberon 11:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wish we could nominate obvious hoaxes for speedy deletion, but unless I'm mistaken this isn't Wikipedia policy? Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 11:59, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not explicitly, but I have seen blatant hoaxes classed as "silly vandalism" and go down quickly under either a gentle stretching of WP:CSD#G3, or slightly less quickly under WP:SNOW. ~Matticus ^T_C 12:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can apply that here. The article claims the religion was founded a week ago and has now grown to a "Major, moderated religion". This isn't the case of a page made by someone with a unique, but sincere religious belief, but a clear case of silly vandalism. I think it qualifies as a case of hoax nonsense as specified here as it is so blatant WP:CSD#G1.Alberon 12:33, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BOLLOCKS. Sanity preserve us from yet another made-up religion article. ~Matticus ^T_C 11:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete - {{db-nonsense}} as clearly WP:BOLLOCKS. --Evb-wiki 12:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a hoax. A disappointing one, too... I was hoping it was a religion that worshipped Kiefer Sutherland. Pinball22 14:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per notability--Zingostar 14:14, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per exactly which bit of the notability criteria, exactly? Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 14:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Having conducted a good-faith Google search, I have found no evidence that this is a religion practiced by a significant number of people, or which has been written about in reliable sources. It appears that this religion is not quite notable enough for Wikipedia to require an article about it. That, and it's a fairly obvious and not particularly interesting joke page which could reasonably have been speedy-deleted as nonsense. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:23, 8 November 2007 (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.