Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louie John Buluran

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. - Mailer Diablo 08:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Louie John Buluran

If this isn't a hoax article, I don't know what one is. He pretty much copied the Allen Iverson article and changed it to be about him. Even the one reference given about leading his team to a state title goes to an article about Iverson. 131 hits for "Louie John Buluran" but none prove his basketball prowess. ZERO hits for Buluran on the PBL's website, which is odd for someone with 3 MVP titles, Rookie of the Year, etc. Delete as a hoax article. Metros232 13:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This was deleted twice on May 10 as G1, then G1/A7/G4 [1]. It doesn't qualify as any of those in its present state since it does assert notability and is coherent (and recreation of deleted material doesn't apply to ones that were speedied). Metros232 15:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete Nonsense. Too subtle to be "patent nonsense", but not subtle enough to be an effective hoax. Sample line: "Louie John Buluran was born in Norzagaray, Bulacan (where both Hampton and Newport News are located)." Oh, are they? Unless someone with a very big shovel recently moved them, I think not. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete, so tagged - I think copying the Allen Iverson article and changing the name to your own counts as patent nonsense. NawlinWiki 16:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong and Speedy Delete as WP:HOAX and WP:PN Scorpiondollprincess 16:29, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Does not qualify for CSD, whether G1 or a hoax. Let this AfD run its course. Owen× ☎ 17:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Response Umm, why should this AFD run its course for 5 days? So that Louie can submit evidence that he really is Allen Iverson? Maybe an application of WP:SNOW is in order. NawlinWiki 18:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Another responce It's been deleted twice before (See above) under speedy templates. I've applied {{db-repost}} as a result of this blatantness. I reccomend protecting-deleting this one since the responsible party has shown he has no qualms about continually re-adding blatant nonsense. 68.39.174.238 08:41, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - I've removed the {{db-repost}} tag, since it's not an exact repost of the earlier deleted content. In fact it's not even close to what it was. It does not qualify to be speedied per WP:CSD. --May the Force be with you! Shr e shth91 ($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 09:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - Yes, in addition to the different content, repost only counts for articles deleted through AfD, not speedy and prod. Metros232 13:00, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since the previous versions were deleted, this wasn't obvious to me. Secondly, the {{db-repost}} only mentions "in accordinance with Wikipedia's deletion policy", the top of which page lists prod and db. 68.39.174.238 11:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, at WP:CSD, G4 says (among other things): "This clause does not apply if the only prior deletions were speedy or proposed deletions" Metros232 12:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete per WP:HOAX and as patent nonsense.--May the Force be with you! Shr e shth91 ($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 09:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete bupkes. — NM Chico24 20:54, 6 August 2006 (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.