Deletion of Kolbrin Bible

Comment: The article as it stands now is quite confusing.  The article (improbably) asserts the antiquity of these manuscripts, while including it among modern pseudepigraphia.  A factual article on the history, the claims made by these texts, and who promotes them, may well pass muster; the article I read doesn't seem to have this information ready.  No opinion yet on whether this |fringe theory has sufficient circulation to be notable, whether on the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints|Mormon level, the Scientology level, or even on the Oahspe level
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)

Comment: I observe that this is a new article nominated for deletion almost as soon as it was created, so that essentilally it has no history.  My reaction to the whole thing is that it is an elaborate hoax.  It is claimed to be heretical Christian (or Judaeo-Christian) literature, and claims a history for the book up to 1184, when suppressed by Edward I (reigned 1272-1307), an obvious anachronism!  It was allegedly preserved by 'religious druids', but Druidism (whatever it was) was a pre-Roman religion in Britain.  Any pagan religion had been extinct in Britain for hundreds of years by 1184.  It was preserved 'on bronze tablets', not a usual medium for literary documents in Britain - parchment was the usual one.  The parent website http://www.thekolbrin.com/ refers to the destruction of Glastonbury Abbey as an arson attack, but the WP article mere mentions a great fire.  That website refers to this as 'the time of history when there was a great suppression of monasterys'.  The greater monasteries (such as Glastonbury) were dissolved in 1539 and lesser ones a few years earlier.  The name 'Culdian Trust' (a sponsoring organisation) reminds me of a word applied to the survivals of the Celtic Church in Scotland (as something distinct from the official Catholic Church).  If this recollection is correct, they are seeking to apply somthing they have heard about Scottish Gaelic Christianity, to an area remote from Scotland that had been under English (i.e. Anglo-Saxon) control for hundreds of years.  It is claimed that the book is in 'Biblical English', but what is that?  There are virtually no English texts of the 12th and 13th centuries, indeed little between the Old English of the Anglo-Saxons and Middle English of Chaucer, but the language used is neither.  It is not even the English of Shakespeare and the King James Bible, since the first person singular is 'you' not 'thou'.  The orthography of the text is modern, from the period after Samuel Johnson's dictionary modernised English spelling (or at least I think that was when spelling changed).  Everything about this subject says HOAX.  The question is then what to do about it.  Straight deletion may lead to re-creation, and a repetition of this debate, no doubt following amendment of the parent website to remove the gross anachronisms pointed out above.  If a book has actually been published, so that the thing is a real existing hoax publication, and not a mere invention of the creator of a website, I think the best solution will be to add a rebuttal of the claims to the article to counter the  that this is a genuine survival.  In order to persuade me that this is not an elaborate hoax, I would need to see an image of the manuscript
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:POV)

Comment: Reading , I agree that whether the book is ancient or a hoax or that's debated doesn't matter so much - other reliable sources besides Wikipedia need to worry about it before an article (based on those) can be kept here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)