Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pear calendar

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 of the debate was Delete. enochlau (talk) 00:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pear calendar, 1 Vernal[edit]

Nonsense? Hoax? Self-promotion? Vanity? I can't find anything meaningful for the term "Pear calendar". User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:47, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Probably vanity or some unknown revision of the French Republican Calendar. But it could be legitimate... JRP 02:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it certainly could be, but with zero Google hits, it's not something we should have in the encyclopedia. User:Zoe|^(talk) 03:08, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Speedy delete JRP 03:46, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete absent verification, and 1 Vernal too. Gazpacho 03:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no verification, no locateable verification --_└^Smith120bh/_TALK^┐ 04:29, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment added 1 Vernal to AfD, put the tag on its page. --_└^Smith120bh/_TALK^┐ 04:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Can't find anything relevant on Google. Acyso 07:42, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unverifiable - couldn't find anything either. Possibly original research. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-02 10:53Z
Weak delete I think this article could benefit from being verified. However, I can understand and allow the above intentions/comments. --Chazz88 12:35, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless it can be verified. Then it'd be nice to know where it's from and who devised it. Dan 19:16, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
verify plus reference. this is reminiscent of the zoroastrian calendar and persian calendar -- Marvin147 04:14, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless verified. -- jaredwf 06:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless verified. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:10, 5 January 2006 (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.