Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beeva Thapa

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.

Beeva Thapa[edit]

The result was Delete as hoax per WP:SNOW. Tabercil (talk) 06:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible hoax. Biographical article with lots of interesting claims, but no sources to back up any assertion. For instance, the article claims that Thapa represented Texas in Congress in 1928, but the available lists of representatives don't mention her. I couldn't find any sources whatsoever when searching by name, and a person this notable would turn up at least a few hits in a google/news/book search. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 04:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, obviously a hoax. In case there's any question, there are no results for "Beeva Thapa" at the Biographical Directory of the US Congress, and her name never appears in the New York Times archives. Zagalejo^^^ 04:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Hoax. The photo in the article certainly isn't that of someone who lived in the period she's supposed to have lived, and, anyway, the first woman to represent a Texas district in the U.S. House of Representatives was Lera Millard Thomas, in 1966. Deor (talk) 04:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(Speedy) Delete - tried different spellings on google .... no hits at all (not even this article, surprising). LonelyBeacon (talk) 04:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The Google database doesn't update instantaneously; this article has only been up for a few hours. If this article lasts the full five-day period on WP:AFD, it will probably show up in Google by then. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the black and white photo is obviously modern based on the hair style ... despite the nineteenth century birth date. LonelyBeacon (talk) 04:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. I'm sure there are several dozen ways to prove this is a hoax. Zagalejo^^^ 05:01, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as hoax. Here's another piece of evidence: a non-natural born citizen could not have been considered a potential Presidential candidate. I wonder what the point of writing this was. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete hoaxtastic. JuJube (talk) 06:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 12:24, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 12:24, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
comment. Most amusing. How quickly can it be deleted? --Paularblaster (talk) 23:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- As soon as another admin comes along to sprinkle some WP:SNOW. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 23:47, 7 January 2008 (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.