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, per WP:SNOW and WP:HOAX. Template was deleted as well; image was deleted as being also a hoax — if there's no such family, they couldn't have had a crest, and the source did not include the image. Nyttend (talk) 22:31, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fujiwara Manami[edit]

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Fujiwara Manami

Batch nomination of a large group of related hoax articles by the same user, starting in December 2008. The articles seem plausible, but the source is wrong (published before subjects were born, and Google searches revealed no information whatsoever on these persons outside mirrors of Wikipedia (of which there are many!). Not being an expert on Japanese nobility, nor being able to do a search with Japanese script (Kanji?), I asked for the advice of User talk:Nihonjoe#House of Kujō, a Japanese admin, who agreed with my opinion but sent me for a second, more thorough look at User talk:Oda Mari#Advice needed, who also could find nothing on these people. If these aren't hoaxes, they are truly not notable and unverifiable anyway. Fram (talk) 07:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominated:

Ryusuke Fujiwara
Taiji Fujiwara
Kumiko Konoe, Duchess of Kujo
Kujō Masahito, Duke of Kujō
Kujō Toshihito
Hamano Michiko
Sadako Kuroi
Kyousuke Fujiwara
Fujiwara Takumi
Sachiko Yoshikuni
Yamashita Aiko
Miku Ishimaru
Kazumi Fujiwara
Toshiharu Fujiwara
Tsukako Fujiwara
Mishiyo Fujiwara
Atsushi Fujiwara
Akemi Fujiwara
Arata Fujiwara
Susumu Fujiwara
Template:Kujo family (yes, templates don't go in an AFD, but I think we can make an exception here).

If these are truly hoaxes, User:Pawadol and User:Kazaza kun should be indef blocked and probably checkusered as well. Fram (talk) 07:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't the users in question be notified of this AfD? Jafeluv (talk) 12:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, both users now notified. Fram (talk) 14:09, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And User:58.8.54.66 should be indef blocked too. Oda Mari (talk) 14:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE ALL per nom. JBsupreme (talk) 07:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about the image of the family mon, uploaded by the same user? -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 13:57, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Better to deleteit as well, just to be safe. Fram (talk) 14:09, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The mon is a correct one, but the image is copyrighted by the sourced site. Oda Mari (talk) 14:50, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The image can't be copyrighted anymore as it's a very old design. It is far outside any possibility of being copyrighted. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:06, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 10:36, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The reference being written before these people were born and the fact that no information of them is found outside Wikipedia are strong indications that these articles are hoaxes. Jafeluv (talk) 12:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete as hoax. None of these names appear in the only listed source. This is unsurprising as most of the subjects were born after the books was published, it only covers Japan through 1334. Edward321 (talk) 13:31, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as blatant hoax. References are highly questionable and non-verifiable. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 13:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as blatant hoax per above. I couldn't find anything on them on the web in Japanese. Oda Mari (talk) 14:50, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as a blatant hoax. The image should not be deleted, though. Everything else can go. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:06, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]