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 deleted as G3 speedy by RHaworth (G3: Blatant hoax). Housekeeping closure. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 13:22, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bodhi stones[edit]

Bodhi stones (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No info found about any Bodhi stone from the Mahabharata. Seems to be a candidate for one of the oldest hoaxes on wikipedia. This article is the only contribution by the creator. PS: there are some Buddhist Bodhi stones, which are unrelated to claims in this article. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:10, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• delete Having searched this several ways I'm not coming up with any positive hits that are not exact reproductions of our text. Mangoe (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I can't escape the same conclusion. There is a Bodhi Stone, an actual artifact at Bodh Gaya with a Harappan carving. But that's clearly not what this article is purportedly about (and isn't notable, I don't think). The Mahabharata is, needless to say, very well studied, and none of the analyses I have rapid access to seem to make any mention of "Bodhi stones", or anything fitting this description. I do find a commercial massage company that uses this as the backstory for stone massage, but given the age of this content, I'm unable to discern if this was added to Wikipedia as stealth-advertising, or if the company adopted the Wikipedia material to their business in good faith. Either way, barring convincing sources to the contrary, the outcome's the same. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 14:01, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete. I have found no reliable sources and such stones "exist" as "stones" used for massage therapy. One Google hit appeared to be a Wikipedia fork. The Snowager-is sleeping 21:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as no evidence of notability, Fails GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 23:20, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete - per nom. Fails GNG. -- Orduin ^Discuss 00:14, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and add to list of hoaxes Only 'evidence' is unreliable and probably taken from here - or the massage connection (which I didn't investigate). Not a blatant hoax for me - those don't take delving into several pages of ghits. Peridon (talk) 13:02, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's no non-mirror evidence for the involvement of Kunz either, and how you could have 'historical occurrences' of something made out a myth I don't quite understand. Those massaging stones look a bit like the wooden things used in the West for darning - usually known as mushrooms. Peridon (talk) 13:12, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above deletion debate is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.