Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lord Borchard de Herle
: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--Ymblanter (talk) 07:23, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
=[[Lord Borchard de Herle]]=
:{{la|Lord Borchard de Herle}} – (
:({{Find sources|Lord Borchard de Herle}})
As far as I am aware, this looks rather like a pretendy fantasy article by a D&D orientated schoolchild. The only online record for this chap are mirror sites of this article. Could someone check up on this please? Otherwise I think this should be deleted. Brendandh (talk) 20:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- Comment - I completed the nom for User:Brendandh using his comment on the article talk page. Ansh666 01:57, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:40, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. Note that there is no entry for this gentleman in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. One would expect such an entry if he existed and did what the article says he did. None of the external links cited mention him. The title "Lord" is only given to sons of marquesses and dukes, not the sons of knights or people ennobled in their own right. I'm thinking hoax. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:06, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Delete JSTOR says no. I'd like to hear from {{u|Gosox5555}} on why they approved this article in the first place. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:06, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Delete -- I smell WP:HOAX. I am not sure that necrothesp is quite right about the title "lord" at this period. It might refer to a baron (apprearing as dm in a Latin orignal). Nevertheless if this had a source in a reputable historian's work, I would not expect that author to have called him "lord" so repeatedly. I also failed to find him in any external links. I do not have the Cambridge Medieval History to check. However, being too familiar with peasants is not treason. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:31, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, "Lord" can refer to a baron, but only before the surname, not the Christian name (i.e. he would be Lord de Herle, not Lord Borchard). This has not changed. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:38, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
- [http://books.google.com/books?id=LOS1c0w91AcC&q=Borchard#v=onepage&q=Borchard&f=false Cambridge Medieval History volume 6] appears to have nothing, so this is a hoax. This is when punitive blocks would be called for. Chris Troutman (talk) 05:57, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
- Yup, delete as hoax. Unfortunately, Gosox is gone, so we're not gonna get anything out of them. Ansh666 15:59, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. It smells wiffy. Szzuk (talk) 16:15, 11 June 2014 (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.