Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pieg

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:58, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pieg

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

No references, and I'm not finding anything supporting the text in a Google search (looked for "pieg literary" and "pieg shakespeare" and found nothing relevant aside from this article's brief text verbatim -- which means either they're not good sources because they copied WP or this article is entirely copyvio). Rhododendrites (talk) 22:19, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I can't find any evidence that this is an actual term. If this is a hoax, it appears to have been one of the longest-lasting hoaxes on Wikipedia -- over eight years. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:32, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No sources and highly contentious claim from Shakespeare. Treat as if a hoax. 209.255.230.32 (talk) 12:19, 1 November 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.