Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jieming Unit: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
JohnCD (talk | contribs)
Line 7: Line 7:
:{{la|Jieming Field}}
:{{la|Jieming Field}}
*'''Delete''' per nom, also noting that the "inventive" units used would not include kilojoules squared for a quantity in the order of 1E76 - you could drop the kilo and change the order to 82. Strong hoax likelihood; I wouldn't waste much time over this one. [[User:Bigbluefish|BigBlueFish]] ([[User talk:Bigbluefish|talk]]) 17:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom, also noting that the "inventive" units used would not include kilojoules squared for a quantity in the order of 1E76 - you could drop the kilo and change the order to 82. Strong hoax likelihood; I wouldn't waste much time over this one. [[User:Bigbluefish|BigBlueFish]] ([[User talk:Bigbluefish|talk]]) 17:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete both''' as hoax. No source, can't find any outside reference, originator's sole contributions, reads like a hoax. Can any German speaker tell us if the originator's username "Kuhvorreiber" offers a clue? It should mean something like "cow-before-rubber". [[User:JohnCD|JohnCD]] ([[User talk:JohnCD|talk]]) 21:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:12, 8 January 2008

Jieming Unit (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Potential WP:HOAX. Googling for "Jieming Unit" yields no hits. Potential attack page on someone named Jieming? Either way, the page fails WP:RS and WP:N. Bundling another related page that was created by the same editor. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 06:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also nominating the following related pages:
Jieming Field (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
  • Delete per nom, also noting that the "inventive" units used would not include kilojoules squared for a quantity in the order of 1E76 - you could drop the kilo and change the order to 82. Strong hoax likelihood; I wouldn't waste much time over this one. BigBlueFish (talk) 17:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both as hoax. No source, can't find any outside reference, originator's sole contributions, reads like a hoax. Can any German speaker tell us if the originator's username "Kuhvorreiber" offers a clue? It should mean something like "cow-before-rubber". JohnCD (talk) 21:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]