Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Una Tribe of Mixed-Bloods

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 17:31, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Una Tribe of Mixed-Bloods[edit]

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

This is a hoax. Essentially, except for making it now about his family and his attempts to start a club, it is a recreation of this deleted autobio: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hereditary Prince Richard Kincaid-Lake, and the user has been warned about creating hoaxes: User page of hoaxer.

This is not a real tribe, and even as a social club it is non-notable. This article was created by Charleswilloughby (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), a sock account of Royalty90 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) (the same user who created the AfDed autobio). It's not sourceable because the sources all go back to the author's personal websites. The same user has tried to have themselves listed as African, Irish and LGBT royalty.[1] The sources, such as this TV spot actually source the fact they are not a tribe. The kid who set up the page has claimed 300 members, but there is no source for this beyond his claims. All indications are the only members are this boy and one or two of his friends or family. - CorbieV^☊ 18:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:31, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:31, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No sourcing to speak of, and those sources included all seem to have been given the same press release materials. Pigman☿/talk 18:57, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Using an additional sock: Rjfc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) The hoaxer previously tried creating an African (I think) tribe, of which his father would be the King, and An Island Kingdom of some sort of which his father would be... Emperor. And yet another autobio. The two failed "tribes" were the same people as his new scam "tribe." You can't make this stuff up. Oh wait, he did. - CorbieV^☊ 23:16, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This may or may not be a hoax. They may be perfectly sincere. Misguided perhaps, but sincere. And the editor's other drafts and behavior don't necessarily mean this article is also problematic. However, this topic fails the most basic Wikipedia General Notability Guideline, that is, it lacks significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Valfontis (talk) 02:36, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm not buying the hoax angle, since the KEZI news piece is there & authentic. However, the group fails WP:GNG, for reasons Valfontis has outlined. I've tagged up as ^{[citation needed]} and toned down rhetoric on some of the more boastful claims about Jeff Merkely support, etc. —Gaff ^ταλκ 04:37, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I should clarify. By "hoax" I don't mean it's just a hoax on WP. The family that is perpetuating this hoax does exist. I mean they pranked the local news station by giving them false figures and lying about who they are. But as we all agree, whether or not this small group is sincere in their beliefs is irrelevant; they are simply not notable. I find it bizarre that this wasn't speedily deleted as soon as any experienced editors spotted it. - CorbieV^☊ 22:32, 7 October 2014 (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.