Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rana lechuza

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 07:26, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The shitty machine-translation makes it difficult to be absolutely sure, but I'm pretty certain this is a hoax. You'll note that the link at the bottom is "completely unrelated to the Lechuza owl" - and also consider the mention of "radioactive experiments by crazy scientists". DS 23:22, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unverifiable. JamesBurns 10:11, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete. Hoax. User talk:200.73.180.22/contrib has been doing hidden vandalism for a while. -Mariano 14:53, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• OK, OK, I over-exagerated all. I just wanted to make it worth reading. Lakes contamination would have been fine, but don't tell me that the experiments thing is not atractive and funny. The man who found the first specimen was not mad. He was australian, but the fact that he supossedly was mad make the text more cinematographic. And the whole thing about the animal madness is pure bullcrap, but everything about the darts is true. If you want to do it, correct the article. Here you will find all the information that you need:

www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/ PDFs/tsprofile_giant_burrowing_frog.pdf Keep verifiable.

• • Ah! Thank you, I've used that information to create Giant burrowing frog, but Rana lechuza is still a mostly-illegible hoax. DS 18:15, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete non existing animal. This author has added several spanish entries about madeup animals for us to translate. I think he's done it in the past, but I can't recall the name of the entry (I think it was Bambachos not sure) but again, I can't be positive about this being the same author. drini ☎ 18:22, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For a verification that this author is just polluting vandals, see Blue tiger where he admits he made up these animals. drini ☎ 18:35, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• speedy Delete; after what happened to Blue Tiger Lectonar 07:56, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and as an aside, frogs are amphibians, not reptiles... So a reptilian frog owl seems hard to believe. That could be down to translation however. Usrnme h8er 08:19, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete as hoax. In Blue Tiger, the author asked us to vote on who would win a fight between the Blue Tiger and the Lechuza Frog: let's make sure they both lose on Wikipedia. Physchim62 18:18, 29 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.