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. A move to the hoax museum should be asked for on WP:REFUND Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:30, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Abner[edit]

Henry Abner (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)

Probable hoax article. See Talk:Henry Abner#No external record of any of these novels for unsuccessful efforts to substantiate the article's content. Deor (talk) 17:39, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A) There is no record of any pre-2016 book by a Henry Abner on worldcat, the British Library catalogue, Amazon, or Abebooks. This includes all of the supposed novels listed.
B) The 'Crime, Mystery, & Gangster Fiction Magazine Index' of pulp fiction authors contains no mention this author existing.
C) None of the 'references' that can be verified of the article contain any reference to an author called a Henry Abner. (Full details on article's talk page)
D) None of the references that have been checked make any reference to the short stories they are cited as discussing.
E) Two sources, in particular, are repeatedly cited: 'Sampson, Robert (1988). Yesterday's Faces' and 'Gerould, K.F. (August 3, 1935). "Murder for Pastime". Saturday Review of Literature: 33.' Both have been checked and neither contain any reference to a Henry Abner, or the supposed works presented in the article.
F) No google search of the titles of the short stories by me or a couple of other editors has yet turned up any positive id of their existence.
G) Some claims about the existence of the stories are flatly counter-factual. Most notably, the 1925 editions of Flynn's do not contain the short story attributed to them, and no issue of Flynn's contains any reference to a Henry Abner.
H) The article was predominantly the creation of a single author (PulpFan35), who originally included an image of a different author before later changing the article image to the present one.
I) The present article image appears to be a doctored image from this source.
It's my feeling that the article contains no notable factual information and should be deleted.Landscape repton (talk) 19:08, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Update: J) Two more of the references have been checked and found wanting. The full archive of Publishers Weekly is text-searchable and contains no reference to a Henry Abner in any edition. New York Libraries ceased publication nearly two years before the supposed edition cited by the article. Details on the talk page of the article.
At this stage, every reference cited to attest to Henry Abner as an author has been found to be misrepresented, and contains no reference to such a figure. These constitute 19 of the 25 footnotes. Landscape repton (talk) 09:09, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:52, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. – Uanfala 20:59, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


It doesn't matter if he was a real person. The problem is he's not a real, notable person, certainly not as an WP:AUTHOR nor as the police chief of Washington, Georgia (pop. c. 4k today). Clarityfiend (talk) 04:54, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The image's use on this page is still odd. It was uploaded by a user named TheJanosCorporation as their 'Own Work' on Nov 1 2016. That's almost two months before it first appeared on Imgur by a user named Bramicles on Dec 29 2016. Landscape repton (talk) 21:00, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion is the first participation on Wiki by User:Bramicles. Carrite (talk) 22:00, 13 July 2017 (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.