Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katipunan Boulevard

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 Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:53, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Katipunan Boulevard

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

There's a "Katipunan Avenue" but never heard of "Katipunan Boulevard". There's no road like this in that area. Apparently a hoax. Kj plma (talk) 03:10, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Having been at the area myself (I have family in the area), it appears there's a "Katipunan Street" near the junction of Quirino Highway and Mindanao Ave. However, this junction is of two grades: Mindanao Ave. goes under Quirino Highway; every intersection near that area is a minor side street. Then the street disappears (ends on a dead end), then the logical continuation a few blocks away is named "Katipunan Ave." (again, different from "the" Katipunan Ave. also from the same city, mailman must be pissed)" then continues until Gen. Luis Street. However, this doesn't seem to be the street the article is describing; nor is the street I described notable enough. So, delete as an elaborate hoax, speedy is possible. –H T D 18:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Having no knowledge of the area, I've been looking at google maps of the area, and based on the route information contained in the article, the article does not appear to describe any road in the area. Furthermore, the km measurements just are not plausible. Practically driving around in circles, its still hard to create a route as long as described, but bound by the roads listed. Every reference is either dead, or does not provide any verification. I'm not going to speedy delete the article, as my view on what counts as blatant hoax is conservative, but this is clearly a hoax, and I would not be surprised if someone else does speedy delete it. Monty ₈₄₅ 21:24, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 5 March 2013 (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.