Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Ghosts of Chernobyl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. --Coredesat 03:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Ghosts of Chernobyl

The_Ghosts_of_Chernobyl (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

Author admits to not having sources. Encylopedias by definition are not places for personal essays but for well documented articles. Strong Delete. Postcard Cathy 17:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

  • This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 14:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
The following text was in the article. I moved it here as it related to the discussion. Tizio 14:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Since I have been warned by a bot and cannot delete/report this document I would like to clarify.
  1. Chernobyl did in fact have a meltdown in reactor number 4 due to power usage experiments.
  2. The reactor melted down due to the fact that their was minimal to no power going to the cooling turbines.
  3. Since the turbines stopped suppling water the core temp became critical melting and burning the graphite control rods.
  4. The heat caused by this fast reacting accident melted the cover to the core itself releasing radiation into the atmosphere.
This article is extremely flawed as their is no story officially or unofficially that I could find, nor were the sources sited for this document. So I warn you be alive this article at your own risk it is in no way true or reliably represents the truth behind the Chernobyl disaster. User:Solaris17
I have removed from the article anything that would be reasonably covered in Chernobyl disaster. Tizio 14:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete since it is uncited, and if there are any citations of ghost stories, there's already Chernobyl in popular consciousness which could be used to hold the information. I would say merge, but lacking citations, and given the quality of the article, there's no real reason to do that. FrozenPurpleCube 15:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Give the author time to provide references for these ghost stories. Anthony Appleyard 15:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as essentially nonsense. Unreferenced and there's really no need for having a new article for every ghost sighting. Pascal.Tesson 15:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete: Per nom. To user:Anthony Appleyard, the editor already admitted to not having any sources, so finding any for such a trivial article will be for a waste. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 16:06, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, apparent fabrication unless proved otherwise.--JyriL talk 16:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete and I strongly suspect that this is a spam teaser page for S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl. - iridescenti (talk to me!) 20:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as unverified and unverifiable.--Isotope23 18:46, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
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.