Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nazuraiun

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. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-13 08:20Z

[edit] Nazuraiun

Nazuraiun (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

The creator of this article User:Nazuraiun has written only this article by the same name [1]. A Google search of Nazuraiun reveals that everyone out there in cyberspace is relying on mirroring this article from Wikipedia. I have asked a few very knowledgeable editors (TShilo12; Briangotts; Dbratton; Jfdwolff; SlimVirgin) if they have heard of "Nazuraiun" and none have had anything to say. User:Dfass responded to me at User talk:IZAK#Nazuraiun that "I never heard of it, and it sounds pretty weird, but that doesn't prove anything. I will ask a couple people... —Dfass 13:57, 7 February 2007 (UTC)" and "I asked my brother, who said he had never heard of this either. He also said there is no mention in either Encyclopedia Judaica or the Merriam Websters Encyclopedia of World Religions. —Dfass 06:24, 8 February 2007 (UTC)." Thus one is forced to conclude that this article is almost certainly a neologism that violates WP:NEO and WP:OR as well as WP:NOT and probably even WP:HOAX. Thank you. IZAK 12:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. -- IZAK 12:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete for above reasons. IZAK 12:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: The article makes far too many unreferenced and bizarre claims. It seems likely that this "religion" exists only in the author's imagination, and he should not be using Wikipedia to promote his fabrications. —Dfass 14:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Hoax. JFW | T@lk 15:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete unverifiable. Beit Or 15:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete' per above. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 15:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, if there were any references by now thy would be included. Without references I can only assert hoax Alf photoman 16:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete unsourced material --Tom 16:54, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. As one of the people the nominator asked for input from re: this article, I did some research yesterday on the subject (sorry I didn't get back to you sooner, IZAK) and came up with a goodly amount of marginally interesting information, none of which supports the claims of the article in question. Like others, I had never heard of the group covered in this article. I have notified the originator of the article here. Tomer^talk 02:20, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

  Comment: BTW, to clarify, it's incredibly difficult to connect any of what I've read about groups referred to as "Nazuraiun" or "Nazareun" or "Nazaraioun" with the subject matter of this article precisely because, without wanting to do too much to denigrate the writing style of the author, the article reads like a laughable drunken (?) joke. To those unfamiliar with Jewish Christians, or Christian Judaizers, or even [to be polite] "deranged" Christians who lay bizarre claim to "connections" with the Davidic dynasty, this article might seem to hold the possibility of authenticity. Trust me...it's pure unmitigated fantasy. Myst is reality long before this stuff is... OK, I'm biting my tongue now, before I say anything incivil on the topic... Tomer^talk 09:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, as unreferenced, un-cited, bizarre, ergo hoaxaliscious. SkierRMH 02:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, unverifiable at best. Daniel^C/_T+ 14:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete no sources or notability--Sefringle 06:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete unverifiable; likely hoax. --MPerel ^{( talk | contrib)} 06:19, 12 February 2007 (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.