Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Order of Saint Catherine with Mount Sinai

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 redirect Order of Saint Catherine with Mount Sinai to Saint Catherine's Monastery and delete Poltorzhitsky. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Order of Saint Catherine with Mount Sinai[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Hoaxes by indef blocked user Victor Freeknight. Siradan (talk) 21:21, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article by the same user:

Redirect Order of Saint Catherine with Mount Sinai to Saint Catherine's Monastery. There's at least one reliable source that shows that the order may have existed, and another source (unsure of reliability) that says that their existence in a formal sense is questionable. I'm not able to find enough reliable sources about the order itself to warrant a separate article, but the monastery is certainly notable. ~~I have no opinion on Poltorzhitsky at this time.~~ After looking at Poltorzhitsky I'd be for deleting it per Andrei Romanenko below. The article is a non encyclopedic mess that could use WP:TNT. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 21:43, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect The main author was not the only user to contribute to the article and it might have some notability. I am not refined with the sources to consider them to be reliable for GNG, so a redirect seems more appropriate. As for Poltorzhitsky, it just seems to be a translation of the Russian page. I don't know if it's notable for the English article. Conyo14 (talk) 21:54, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's simpler to delete Poltorzhitsky then to save it. The whole article is googletranslated beginning with its pseudo-English name Poltorzhitsky (instead of original spelling Półtorzycki). This family of Polish nobility with Tartarian roots really existed and the Polish historian pl:Stanisław Dziadulewicz had several pages about it in his seminal Herbarz rodzin tatarskich w Polsce (1929), pp. 255-258 here. But few sentences from this really reliable source are lost in the present article amidst tons of irresponsible ranting. In Russian, however, I had rewritten it into more or less tolerable stub ru:Полторжицкие, if anybody is willing to translate it into English to replace the article under scrutiny - you are welcome. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:58, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Given that context, it might be better as a draft to translate the stub article. Conyo14 (talk) 22:37, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Awards-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:28, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unsourced and definitely a hoax, the only references (outside of the books with no page numbers suspiciously) are the websites of the several of these "orders". Some of their images (like their grandmaster's) are AI-generated too.JamesKnowsJames (talk) 06:33, 14 July 2023 (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.