Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wettershaw Manor

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. KrakatoaKatie 04:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wettershaw Manor

Wettershaw Manor (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Procedural nomination only. AfD discussion transferred from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shaw History, with which it was originally bundled See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hans Albrecht III for an article on a man who appears to be the owner of Wettershaw Manor and a related AfD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shaw History. --Eastmain (talk) 02:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Delete Hoax CWii(Talk|Contribs) 20:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


As a community in Shaw we have gone door to door to have people submit a rebutle to the statements of Shaw and the community and of the Wetter family that lives here. I have been given the rare oportunity to visit and see his library and the family bible that was made about 1650-1700 with entires that go back about 300years before. Really cool book to see and I am thankful that he was kind enough to show me. We hope you get swamped with rebuttals over your malicious attacks 72.193.204.212 (talk) 23:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC) — 72.193.204.212 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

As for Wettershaw Manor not Being on the National Register of Historic Places dose not make it not a home of history. If someone would look ut up before calling everything a hoax, Its listed with the Boone county Historical scocity, and 4 othe small one i can find. Try and look at what is being done good not at what you have not heared off, but go out and read a book on the area. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.245.7.70 (talk) 00:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC) — 4.245.7.70 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

  • I feel the same about this site as well...Mr Brecwrewer I want to thank you for the amount of time you spent complaining about this information being put up in just one day, yet you have miraculously researched, pulled Genealogy records, church records, sensus records and read so many books and pulled the information down in the same amount of time and calling the family a hoax. To me you sound like a history HOAX, selfappointed EXPERT. I cannot believe one person to be an expert in Medieval history, European history, Renaissance history, Holy Roman Empire history, Swiss history, US history, Missrouri history, Boone County history etc. You must me a man of great importance to know so much in all these fields that most PhDs can claim to be in only one. One would think that leaving the page up for a time would have given time to have more references to be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Azsteve (talk • contribs) 01:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC) — Azsteve (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


I would like to know how a 13 year old computer 'whiz' is capable of determining that Missouri history, manor homes over 200 years old, and family trees hoaxes! Considering the difficulty in tracing much of this information via the internet, how did you come by the information to deem this fake? It can take a trained geneologist and historian months and years to trace family history, history of homes. Yet it took hours for a few people to determine all this information is a hoax. I realize WP is an encyclopedia. But it is a community based one. If people are shot down when trying to contribute, how is the content to be exanded? Janetw2008 (talk) 02:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC) — Janetw2008 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. striking sockpuppets

  • Strong Delete Obvious hoax. Edward321 (talk) 02:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment: I don't think this article is a hoax: Wettershaw Manor clearly exists, and is an old house. But there are serious verifiability and COI issues with this article, and the subject may not meed notability guidelines. -- Shunpiker (talk) 03:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

*Keep, Keep I want say that I am Tim mann out of NY, I put up history that I have worked on for over 10 years, Mr Brewcrewer, how hids under a name, did his study in less thr 48 hr. YES i put it up in one day, i had the day off, i work for a living, I had it on paper and put it up, I have tons more to put up too. I would have loved to give you more so you could find it alot faster but brewcewer want it all down. Note that many of you if taken a little time , is finding things on it, but I thank you you took longer then 2 days to try and come to an a Fact. A hoax, No you Mr brewcrewer are, two days and he knows it all, most of you have found thing on the House,Town and Family, If i would have been given more time i would have added a lot, and i woul hope that others would too. But history ill be lost.Mr brewcrewer did not like one thin and went after it all, Jelles ha, Note He took down things on the Conaradines family members i put up, NOTE that as to just Rudolf having no kids, is wrong, on WP, there are 6 other pages that say he did, one of the was Duke of Swabia Berthold I, but he kows all the great histoy man. He took down and changet things with out one Refference and source, he did not let you see what was up till he pulled it down. Over a yera ago i went west on a trip, I stoped by and took a tour of Weyyershaw maner I saw shaw and I meet the man, He is who I said he was and it is a photo of him. Learn to take time and look things up and give it some time, you may learn something Mr brewcrwer self made history giant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Loveofhistorynut (talk • contribs) 17:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Also to note that mr. brewcrewer took down over 90% of what i put up in history, He changed took down bi's and full pages that you could not see and let you the good people of WP get only 10% of what I put up and call it a Hoax, It sounds like making people get only 10% of the story is a Hoax. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Loveofhistorynut (talk • contribs) 18:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC) striking sockpuppets
  • Delete. Not a hoax, but insufficient evidence of notability from WP:reliable source coverage. The article is a spammy-toned brochure for a possibly historic home-turned-B&B. From a source cited,[1] a man name Wetter found a 200-year-old home, restored it, substantially modified it, and superimposed his name and background on the place. Could have been NRHP listed, but documentation and historic preservation not done. Locally interesting project, but WP:NN. Worth a sentence or two in the article for its town. • Gene93k (talk) 10:36, 26 February 2008 (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.