Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phil McCoy

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 delete as hoax. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:40, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Phil McCoy[edit]

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

Article is a WP:HOAX. There is no Burlington nature artist named Phil McCoy. The two book sources are bogus. The ISBN for the first book actually belongs to "Playboy: Redheads", and the second ISBN doesn't match any book. A search by title turns up no indication that these books exist. The third reference purports to be a book about the environmental crisis of the 70's and a NY Times bestseller. The link leads to a set of PDFs for NY Times fiction bestsellers which makes no sense for what would be a non-fiction book. For somebody who was such a prolific and well known artist, there is no trace of him in a google search. Whpq (talk) 10:21, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete good catch - based on this note I thought this was just a crazy person desperate to get a Wikipedia article for their relative; but user's talk page shows they have created numerous nonsense and should have been banned months ago. I cannot believe this has existed for so long - the first draft of the Phil McCoy article included a painting by Hitler credited to McCoy. —Мандичка^YO 😜 11:36, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per comments above. DBaK (talk) 12:29, 3 June 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.