Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Three Tins Pails
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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) 2007-03-04 01:53Z
[edit] Three Tins Pails
I cannot find any evidence that this novel exists by googling. I am including the related article Patrick C. Easley in this AfD. FisherQueen (Talk) 21:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Seems like a hoax, or some sort of advance-marketing technique. Either way, delete. Freshacconci 21:19, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Probably hoax. Zero google hits for a 2007 book says it all. --Daniel J. Leivick 21:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Delete It's fake. I watched my friend at school make it myself. (Sorry Patrick, it was doomed anyway :P) Sincerely, Thrashmeister {U|T|C} 22:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment " WHo cares its just a page just beacuase its fake doesnt mean it isnt funny! Go Patrick it rocks!" E —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.57.201.227 (talk) 02:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC).
- Delete both. If the fact that unpublished doctoral theses from 70 years ago are listed on Amazon.com and this book isn't didn't make it abundantly clear that this is a hoax, the previous comment certainly did. Natalie 03:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Delete for now First write the book, then make a page about it. That's the usual order. Guthrie 13:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Both until you've written the book and got it published. As Guthrie says, that's the usual order. It sounds like a good story, though: you write it and get it published, and I'll buy it. ( Heck, if Eragon can get published, this should have a chance ! ) WMMartin 14:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Both Yes, it's definitely a hoax...and if it isn't why would the author/publisher have been stupid enough not to copyright it. Avisitor2 13:56, 3 March 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.
