Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phramus

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 speedily deleted (G3) by Rmhermen. Non-admin closure. Deor (talk) 20:07, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Phramus

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

Google does not find anything on this except for sites that just copied this article. Possible hoax? Either way unsourced and couldn't find any sources. Rhododendrites (talk) 22:01, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as hoax, especially since the "flutin rod" does not exist either as far as I can see. Funnyfarmofdoom _{(talk to me)} 22:17, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I agree; it's a hoax. The terms do not exist outside of Wikipedia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:22, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no coverage in reliable sources found for this term. Gong show 23:13, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:43, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as above. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:54, 1 November 2013 (UTC).[reply]
Speedy delete as a hoax. I've tagged the article as such. This is either a complete hoax or something so incredibly obscure that it was never a widely used term. The editor in question seems to be an otherwise good, albeit sporadic, editor so I wonder if this was an early test page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:01, 1 November 2013 (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.