Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philodoppides

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:13, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Philodoppides[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)

As Poimenlaon suggests on the talk page, this article appears to be a well-crafted hoax: Gerber, who is repeatedly cited, does not even mention a poet named Philodoppides. Neither do Callimachus frr. 439-40 or Maciver. The two important modern reference works (Oxford Classical Dictionary and Brill's New Pauly) carry no hint of this supposed poet. Everything points to this article's being a hoax and as such it should be deleted. Modussiccandi (talk) 18:29, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Literature, Poetry, and History. Modussiccandi (talk) 18:29, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per @Poimenlaon and @Modussiccandi. Jahaza (talk) 19:56, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:03, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Why do people do these things?★Trekker (talk) 22:14, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Should we ask @LegesRomanorum: why they decided to do this?★Trekker (talk) 09:03, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: aside from the reasons already given, it is suspicious that this poet should be from Messenia, which during this period was controlled by Sparta and its inhabitants effectively enslaved. (And, for completion's sake I checked Laura Swift's recent Companion to Greek Lyric, in which he inevitably does not feature) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 22:23, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(ec)Delete per talk page comment; non-existent in the most comprehensive reference works. Somewhat cleverly put together, unfortunate the effort was not put into creating an actual page. – Michael Aurel (talk) 22:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's a fake. No corresponding article in RE either. Ifly6 (talk) 02:59, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment For purposes of listing at Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia, this page was created at 16:38, 11 May 2020. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 04:57, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Found absolutely nothing on him in Greek language. ǁǁǁ ǁ Chalk19 (talk) 13:41, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and indef the creator. Srnec (talk) 20:07, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I rechecked five of the references: they are well chosen, but all are false, including the Callimachus. The quoted Greek and Latin is nearly all grammatical but without any spark of life: I selected several phrases from these quotations, searched on Google, and found that none of them occurs anywhere on the Web except in this article and in a few Wikipedia mirrors. Agree with @Michael Aurel:. Andrew Dalby 13:00, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Question: the list of hoaxes linked above suggests that we save some well-crafted ones, and this one seems to have slipped under the radar for a while—it's definitely well-crafted. But I could be misinterpreting what I saw. If they can be saved, it obviously shouldn't be in article mainspace, as I understand the terminology (which is barely). What exactly are the criteria, or procedures involved, to the extent that there's at least an informal process? Or is it so informal that there really isn't a "process" per se? P Aculeius (talk) 12:48, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@P Aculeius I don't understand what you're trying to ask. This right now is the process. You're in it. -- asilvering (talk) 21:30, 28 August 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.