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. Considering the creator/main editor has been blocked for "hoaxes" and that this AfD is unanimous, I think a case could be made for CSD'ing as a hoax... so I'll close this AfD as Snow deletion. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 13:47, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Empire of Luxembourg (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)

This appears to be a hoax. I don't have to the two sources but searching on google for some of the aspects of the story come up completely empty. There is no mention of a Roberto Mendeleev, the Supplicant Revolution, or Hansel the Terrible in google. The final two sentences really push this to be a hoax, I can not understand how politics can trigger a sponge migration. GB fan 18:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - This is bad hoax, not even has some humour. The Principality of San Marino was much better. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 18:14, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I created the article two months ago, and in the last few days a few pranksters came and added the crap about sponge migrations etc. I've removed what they added. The original paragraph is factually accurate, and is not a hoax. Thanks --Bananaman321 (talk) 18:33, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum - The article meets all of Wikipedias notability guidelines and is verifiable. It is perfectly acceptable, as per Wikipedia:Verifiability, to not use English language sources. None of this article's detractors have actually checked the articles sources, but have only argued for deletion on the basis of the sources being in non-English languages and difficult to verify online, which are not reasons for deletion in accordance with Wiki policy. Additionally, this deletion proposal was made because of hoax material added by vandals, which has since been removed. Therefore I strongly urge that we keep this article until the sources in the article are checked. If they are found inadequate I will happily support deletion. Thanks. --Bananaman321 (talk) 17:35, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Henry VII was a Holy Roman Emperor, the first in the House of Luxembourg, and even there I don't see a "declaration of the Empire of Luxembourg". The closest thing that I can find that is not a hotel called the Empire of Luxembourg is the Luxembourg Empire Tiara, which does exist. Funny as it sounds, the Tiara does not have a WP article although it has references and seems notable to me. This article fails WP:V and WP:RS and is possibly a hoax. - Pmedema (talk) 18:46, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Firstly, the article references Henry V, not Henry VII, so I fail to see why this is relevant here, and secondly, the article mentions no "declaration of the Empire of Luxembourg". I do not understand why you are criticizing this article for things which it does not claim to contain. Also, the hotel. Let's just get this out of the way, the hotel debate is irrelevent here, so this isn't against your comments, but just saying for everyone after me, it is clear that the hotel is in no way tied to this article, nor could one have heard of the hotel and derive the content here from that. Also, I personally have never heard of this hotel, and it seems it would be a rather obscure thing to base a hoax article off of, since that is what you are claiming this article to be. Also, who, as a hoax, makes a historical page about Luxembourg? Let me answer, no one. I've seen plenty and plenty of Wikipedia hoaxes and vandalism, and this simply doesn't fit the profile. Sure it might have obscure references, but have you read them? I assume not. I believe that this article out to be revised to be more verifiable, but deletion is not the answer in this case. --Loganrobert96 (talk) 21:14, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Here there is detailed information on the history of Luxembourg, but I cannot see any reference to the empire; why? --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 18:58, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I suggest skeptics check the sources cited in the article before they advocate for deletion. --Bananaman321 (talk) 23:26, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:20, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Luxembourg-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:20, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:20, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete JSTOR has nothing. I would read the cited sources if they were in English and available to me, but alas. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: I have blocked Loganrobert96 (talk · contribs) as a vandalism-only account, plus an IP that was apparently his. I suspect Bananaman321 and he are an attempted good-hand/bad-hand pair. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:23, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I agree. EditShark32, Bananaman321, Loganrobert96 ... --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 05:23, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -- While I am no expert, the whole thing reads like rubbish. Bulgaria was far toofar away to have ingervened in Germany. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:01, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It's bullshit. Whoever wrote this threw some names and facts together from about the same time period, but nothing here matches anything of known history. Complete bullshit. --Jayron32 03:54, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. If there's no online evidence at all to support this, not even in JSTOR, then it's a hoax. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:15, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - This isn't my specialism, but that's just not the way empires in Europe worked in those days. There was one Empire - the one which was becoming known as the Holy Roman Empire. (There was the Eastern Empire too; but they were for some purposes treated as both being contested claims to the Roman Empire.) The age of nation-states kicking off their own empires was many centuries in the future. This is a crafty, but ill-thought-out, hoax. AlexTiefling (talk) 21:22, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - other places were called "empires" - Bulgaria for example, also the king of Spain (or of various Spanish kingdoms) sometimes claimed to be an emperor; it's not impossible that this guy called himself an emperor too, but it's unlikely. Also, as mentioned, even if the Germans allied with the Bulgarians, that doesn't mean the Bulgarian tsar himself could have showed up in Luxembourg (especially not this particular tsar who was a bit busy at home). I can see how the two sources listed in the article could have been misunderstood...but like everyone else I have no access to them either (but I would happily read them for you, if I could find them). In any case, even if this was a real thing, is an extremely short-lived claim to an empire worthy of its own article? It could simply be mentioned in Henry V's article if it turns out to be real. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:03, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The standard source on the history of the Holy Roman Empire "Regesta Imperii" does not mention any of the claimed events, see Regesta Imperii for the year 1256. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 19:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. See Heinrich V., Graf von Luxemburg-Ligny in ADB. It is possible that this is an honest misunderstanding, since Henry did invade his neighbour in 1256. It might just be that the cited source calls this an effort to build an "empire". I doubt it (because of the Bulgarian nonsense), but it is possible. Srnec (talk) 19:43, 29 June 2014 (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.