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. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 00:35, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Ari of Greece (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

The article is about a person that either does not exist, or is not an actual Prince of Greece. This is evident in the lead-in, as both his supposed parents do not exist. His father Prince Petros II does not exist, nor does his mother Princess Angelica. Furthermore, she is purported to be the youngest daughter of Frederik IX of Denmark, when it is known that his youngest daughter is actually the Queen of Greece, Anne-Marie. The article seems to be modeled on the article on Prince Philippos of Greece. "Prince Ari" is inserted in the line of succession in the place that Prince Philippos would occupy, as can be verified by checking the article on the line of succession. Furthermore, the references are bogus. The first lists no "Prince Ari", while the second is a page copying the lay-out of the website of the Royal House of Greece, but actually appears on an entirely different site. Please delete this nonsense. Druworos 22:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete Delete the pretender as expeditiously as possible. Obvious hoax. Clarityfiend 00:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete in a regular manner as a hoax. Hoaxes aren't speedyable, since best practice is to get as many people as possible to look at them in case there's a grain of truth. In the case of an article which reads "...the youngest daughter of King Frederik IX of Denmark and his shamed wife Phil Spector" in part, though, I'm not going to be surprised if there's no truth here. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 00:57, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The 'Phil Spector' thing was an old piece of vandalism which I have reverted. The article does appear to be a hoax though. DuncanHill 02:40, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, checking through the edit history, this seems to be an attempt by a particular user to write about themselves (with a fanciful claim to notability in order to prevent the article being speedied). A lot of the anon edits could easily end up being friends adding nonsense here and there. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 07:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. --Evb-wiki 15:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Stoic atarian 22:29, 6 June 2007 (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.