| Revision as of 05:47, 2 June 2009 editZetawoof (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers9,441 edits →Deudonic War: del - hoaxalicious← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:55, 2 June 2009 edit undoShnitzled (talk | contribs)153 edits →Deudonic WarNext edit → | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
| **'''Comment''': Can you explain to me exactly what gives you the right to request a permanent block on another user? ] (]) 05:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC) | **'''Comment''': Can you explain to me exactly what gives you the right to request a permanent block on another user? ] (]) 05:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :: Maybe you can help us out here and point us to the source of the article you created. The book, the newspaper, the documentary, the journal article or the webpage that is the basis of your information on this war. Regarding your question, why those who damage Misplaced Pages by creating hoax articles should be blocked should be obvious to you. ] (]) 05:44, 2 June 2009 (UTC) | :: Maybe you can help us out here and point us to the source of the article you created. The book, the newspaper, the documentary, the journal article or the webpage that is the basis of your information on this war. Regarding your question, why those who damage Misplaced Pages by creating hoax articles should be blocked should be obvious to you. ] (]) 05:44, 2 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ***'''Well look at you, you been here since only the 15th of May, and yet you still think you can march around the place like you run it, demanding people to be blocked! Get over yourself, you'll only piss even more people off. ] (]) 05:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. Smells like a hoax to me. The details are inconsistent: the text claims that "less than 50 men on each side" were involved, but the infobox says that over a thousand men were on each side; the text says that there were "3 minor battles" in "24 to 48 hours", but the infobox says that there were only two generals, one on each side. (A single general could hardly fight three distinct battles with the same army in the space of 48 hours!) Also, "Deudonic" looks like a takeoff on "]", which is a term used for the Germans - yet no Germans were involved in this war. No sane historian would use such a confusing name for such a minor war! ]<sub>(])</sub> 05:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC) | *'''Delete'''. Smells like a hoax to me. The details are inconsistent: the text claims that "less than 50 men on each side" were involved, but the infobox says that over a thousand men were on each side; the text says that there were "3 minor battles" in "24 to 48 hours", but the infobox says that there were only two generals, one on each side. (A single general could hardly fight three distinct battles with the same army in the space of 48 hours!) Also, "Deudonic" looks like a takeoff on "]", which is a term used for the Germans - yet no Germans were involved in this war. No sane historian would use such a confusing name for such a minor war! ]<sub>(])</sub> 05:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 05:55, 2 June 2009
Deudonic War
- Deudonic War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Looks like a hoax. Searching via Google and Google Books gives zero related hits for the word Deudonic, searching for the numbers given in the infobox or the names of the commanders gives also zero related hits. If confirmed that this is a hoax, please someone permanently block the creator of this hoax article. Stepopen (talk) 04:42, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Delete: Without some evidence it happened, it needs to go. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Comment: Can you explain to me exactly what gives you the right to request a permanent block on another user? Shnitzled (talk) 05:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe you can help us out here and point us to the source of the article you created. The book, the newspaper, the documentary, the journal article or the webpage that is the basis of your information on this war. Regarding your question, why those who damage Misplaced Pages by creating hoax articles should be blocked should be obvious to you. Stepopen (talk) 05:44, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Well look at you, you been here since only the 15th of May, and yet you still think you can march around the place like you run it, demanding people to be blocked! Get over yourself, you'll only piss even more people off. Shnitzled (talk) 05:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Smells like a hoax to me. The details are inconsistent: the text claims that "less than 50 men on each side" were involved, but the infobox says that over a thousand men were on each side; the text says that there were "3 minor battles" in "24 to 48 hours", but the infobox says that there were only two generals, one on each side. (A single general could hardly fight three distinct battles with the same army in the space of 48 hours!) Also, "Deudonic" looks like a takeoff on "Teutonic", which is a term used for the Germans - yet no Germans were involved in this war. No sane historian would use such a confusing name for such a minor war! Zetawoof(ζ) 05:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC)