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 (WP:G3) by User:Bbb23. (non-admin closure)‎ Jfire (talk) 22:17, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Codex coemeterium[edit]

Codex coemeterium (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

De-prodded article. Original PROD reason, by Pallidus-leo: This codex almost certainly does not exist. No evidence for it's existence predate this wikipedia page and none of this pages sources refer to it in any way.

I seconded the PROD: The manuscript index catalogue of the Czech national library is here: https://www.en.nkp.cz/collections/by-document-type/historical-book-collection/manuscripts-and-incunabula/rukopisy-en. There is no "sb" shelfmark.

Declined by Kvng, reason: Deletion contested, PROD is for uncontroversial deletions asilvering (talk) 06:00, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. asilvering (talk) 06:00, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. I suspect the other creation by User:Lucien Astor, Ordo Secreta Sapientiae, is a hoax as well. Jfire (talk) 06:32, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Checking out the sources in the article, it turns out that they only support the parts of their respective sentences that are not about this subject. Neither of them say anything about the claimed subject.

  But what stopped me looking for serious sources was turning up a WWW forum post made by someone with the name Lucien Astor stating that xe had invented this as a piece of performance art where xe and two others pretend to be psychics for corporate entertainment, apparently another magic trick that xe was selling to people. And xe put it as a hoax in Wikipedia, ten months after posting that, it seems.

  This is not only a hoax, it is a hoax for commercial purposes, intended to support someone selling decks of gimmicked cards.

  Uncle G (talk) 07:49, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering, a successful prod results in WP:SOFTDELETE. That is not an appropriate outcome for a WP:HOAX. ~Kvng (talk) 15:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Hoax StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 18:11, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete - Hoax created as part of a magic trick. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:43, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I went ahead and called for speedy deletion since it was blatantly a hoax. Someone can close this AfD now. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 20:25, 17 February 2024 (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.