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 Speedy delete: Whereas this is likely a hoax, I speedy deleted the article as G5 - creation by a blocked user in evasion of a block--Ymblanter (talk) 17:42, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cavis Appythart

[edit]
Cavis Appythart (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No clam of notability, and this article is unsourced as per Insertcleverphrasehere. Sheldybett (talk) 00:34, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 00:35, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure why the nominator thought that removing the PROD in favour of AfD was the right course of action. No one had contested. but I guess this will give reason for CSDing future re-creations. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 16:14, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's a fictional character, but that doesn't make it a hoax... Doesn't meet this CSD criteria. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 16:14, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Then why has every single other iteration been deleted as a hoax created by this sock master? Even if G3 doesn't apply, G5 certainly does given they are socks of a globally locked LTA. Praxidicae (talk) 16:17, 30 October 2018 (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.