Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Admiral Jachimov
- 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 Speedy delete (G3) by Sphilbrick (non-admin closure) NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:30, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
- Admiral Jachimov (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:NOR MarkYabloko 17:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
- Comment - Article qualifies for speedy deletion. AfD template was placed in error (and reverted immediately), however it was bot re-reverted and the article ended up here. MarkYabloko 18:02, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. May be dealing with an editor operating in bad faith. The editor's other creation Ernst Dudeheim (now a redirect) was a copy-paste WP:CFORK of the same person Henry Dudeney. -- GreenC 18:10, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 05:26, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 05:26, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - Don't find any refs to support notability. Lakun.patra (talk) 05:28, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- Comment - Searches in Russian Wikipedia and Yandex (Russian search engine) have yielded nothing on the subject of the article. MarkYabloko 09:16, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - nothing in English or Russian online about an admiral whom the first draft of the article claimed was covered in glory during the reign of Peter the Great. Probable hoax, especially in light of creator's other contribution. Norvoid (talk) 11:00, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- Tagged as G3 as searches clearly found nothing and this is therefore obvious vandalism. SwisterTwister talk 18:15, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- 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.