Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gracie and Zarkov

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. Kevin (talk) 22:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gracie and Zarkov[edit]

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

Delete. not notable. page has been created by a sockpuppet (Obuibo Mbstpo) of a banned user (Sarsaparilla). this banned user is known for creating hoax articles. Cordyceps2009 (talk) 17:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Uh, I'm not very experienced in the area of drug experiments, but I think the entry in the Sisters of the extreme: women writing on the drug experience and another independent descripition of their methods, together with the sources already cited in the article is sufficient for inclusion. I'm not sure with the reliability of my second source, this is really strange area... Cordyceps2009, elaborate your arguments by providing convincing reasoning, your nomination statement is insufficient. --Vejvančický (talk) 19:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is not a hoax. I also don't judge the editors. I'm talking about notability of this article. --Vejvančický (talk) 20:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:43, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I won't pretend to have read Notes from Underground but a search of the Project Gutenberg text doesn't turn up the names Gracie or Zarkov, so the article author is probably referring to another (less-notable) document of the same name. Whatever it is doesn't have a page on Wikipedia and no citation is given so it's impossible to tell if these people/characters, who appear to only be notable in the context of that single text, actually even exist. The article therefore fails WP:N and is fundamentally unverifiable. (If the appropriate text surfaces, we should maybe redirect Gracie and Zarkov to the book they appear in rather than giving them a stand-alone article.) - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:20, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If they are not notable enough to be worth even a mention in Dimethyltryptamine then their own article isn't justified. --Pontificalibus (talk) 11:13, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So they're not notable, because they're not mentioned in a related Wikipedia article? If I add their names and relevant information to Dimethyltryptamine, will you vote "keep"? It is an unusual attitude. --Vejvančický (talk) 07:27, 15 October 2009 (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.