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 speedy deleted as WP:G3. Just Chilling (talk) 18:05, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Hammet Cult[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No reliable sources; may be an ad or a hoax. John Nagle (talk) 07:37, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article came up at WP:COIN, and appeared to be a promotion for a movie in development. The only sources are sites affiliated with the movie. The people mentioned on those sites as being involved with some murder cult don't come up in Google searches. There are no relevant news items. There's nothing in reliable sources. Or even semi-reliable sources. Something that newsworthy which happened in 2011 would have news coverage. Looks like WP:HOAX and WP:AD. Thanks. John Nagle (talk) 07:45, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 07:50, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as hoax (WP:G3): if, as the article claims, some of those people were convinced of a crime in 2011, surely it would be easy to find a link to the judgement. The absence of such sources constitutes in my opinion "blatant and obvious disinformation". As people may disagree with this argument from silence, I did not put the Speedy deletion tag myself. Tigraan (talk) 10:47, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as hoax (WP:G3). The article is possibly promotional material for a "mockumentary production".[1] - Location (talk) 14:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:41, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a hoax and a gross misuse of Wikipedia. Adverting for a supposed mockumentary film. Source even explains lack of coverage by reliable sources. No reliable evidence found that the film or the event is real. • Gene93k (talk) 17:37, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as hoax. unclear why this isn't speedy but oh well. Jytdog (talk) 18:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Joseph2302 (talk) 01:09, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged for speedy deletion as a blatant hoax. Cavarrone 17:30, 2 April 2015 (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.