- 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. Insufficient coverage in reliable sources to demonstrate that this hoax is in any way notable. ~ mazca talk 12:42, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Helius project (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable hoax —SpaceFlight89 07:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- References including well known source and school course material has been recovered and added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dc mn (talk • contribs) 07:58, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Those references are the hoax's own website, a blog from a New Zealand school, and a blog claiming that this is an all-time great Internet hoax. That being said, there are zero hits on Google News for it, and a microscopic 73 unique G-hits for it. While the Google Test is generally taken with a somewhat deserved grain of salt, it's very difficult to base the notability of a subject on its popularity as an Internet hoax when the Internet doesn't seem to have heard of it. RGTraynor 10:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Only sources fail WP:RS standards for determining notability for a Wikipedia article in a quite dramatic way. If that's all there is, nobody cares. DreamGuy (talk) 18:57, 20 August 2009 (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.