Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khanoda
Source: 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. JForget 22:47, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Khanoda & all in category:Khanoda
- Khanoda (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Ok not sure what to make of this one. I would say this is a hoax but I can find his albums for sale. But that's it that is the only thing I can confirm, everything else I find online is just mirrors of various wiki articles, or the AMG link. I have a feeling this is notable, but I am totally unable to prove it in even the slightest way. Ridernyc (talk) 02:47, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- More info, even when I try to search for Kommunion Recording Company the same just a ton of mirror sites. Ridernyc (talk) 02:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- More info again, Every article about this artist have been created by the same user, and with the exception of maintenance edits have been edited exclusively by that user for years now. This is looking more and more like some sort of hoax. Ridernyc (talk) 03:11, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- talk) 00:12, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- delete all Elaborate promotion or hoax by Billbo_merkz (talk · contribs) and Quake2000 (talk · contribs) (single-purpose accounts, possibly the same body). NO evidence of independent review or big labels. Someone had big fun. This is a weakness of wikipedia: I've seen numerous rappers & albums claiming fame, but since nobody really care they thrive in wikipedia. Laudak (talk) 00:42, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- PS This edit (and some others) of the author of all this stuff reminded me my childhood: when playing hide and seek, and nobody can find you for a long time, you get bored and make a noise to attract attention to be found....in vain... Laudak (talk) 00:46, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. This appears to be clear-cut vandalism, to the point where I think the above noted creator and other user are moving and/or editing articles in an attempt to dodge the repercussions of AFD. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 02:24, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]- I take this back. Remaining neutral for now. Researching further. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 02:30, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete it. I've been trying to remove the pages since Spring 2007, but they would be restored seconds later. So, remove them.(Billbo_merkz) —Preceding undated comment added 22:25, 6 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]
- um... yeah, OK. Then why are you moving the articles in an attempt to avoid deletion? --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 19:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can't find anything on this guy. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 03:06, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]- OK, changing my !vote again. Back to speedy delete, but for an odd case of vandalism. Please refer to the comments on user:Laudak's page from the main contributor. Time to work on that. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 19:16, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nn. BTW, the contributor the contributor indicated it was a promotional campaign. - Altenmann >t 21:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Indeed, which contradicts dickitude. Time to remodel my !vote again. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 19:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Indeed, which contradicts
- 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.