Talk:List of hoaxes

The article Reddit serial killer hoax was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 23 September 2013 with a consensus to merge the content into List of hoaxes. If you find that such action has not been taken promptly, please consider assisting in the merger instead of re-nominating the article for deletion. To discuss the merger, please use this talk page.

Do not remove this template after completing the merger. A bot will replace it with {{afd-merged-from}}.

Archives

Index 1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

A "hoax" that isn't a hoax

Hey, what do I do if a "hoax" is scheduled for deletion but I happen to know it's NOT a hoax: indeed, I can even provide one or more scholarly references therefor?

What do I do?

Oodly ooh? Bing bing bing bing BruceDavidWilner (talk) 19:29, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Providing more specifics generally gets you better advice, but based purely on what you have said here, providing third party, reliably published sources that discuss the subject in a significant manner is generally what needs to be done to save a page from deletion. :Personal knowledge of Wikipedia editors doesnt count. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:56, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Taured

"Taured" redirects here but there is absolutely nothing in the article about it 74.90.214.164 (talk) 03:57, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Nomenclature

Many of the examples given do not fit the accepted definition of a hoax. That is, a lie perpetrated simply to demonstrate the gullibility of the victim, with no intention to benefit financially, and with the joke being revealed voluntarily by the perpetrator after a relatively short time. Many of the cases mentioned were outright frauds, or were lies which the perpetrators never admitted to be lies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.146.107 (talk) 22:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keow Wee Loong

Only reliable source(except judging by his own words that contain statements that can be proven false) proving what he did as hoax, and it isn't very clearly said, either: http://time.com/4403093/fukushima-exclusion-zone-japan-photos/ ※〶 02:29, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ysolo (Albanian eggplant festival)

Since 2012, our article on List of harvest festivals has included a mention of Ysolo, purportedly a “festival marking the first day of harvest of eggplants in Tirana, Albania”. I believe this is a hoax. I will shortly delete it from that article, but it might be deserving of mention here, because it seems that its appearance on that page has led to a mountain on Ceres being officially named Ysolo Mons after the spurious festival. (See [1][2][3].) The hoax would seem to have been remarkably successful. —Mark Dominus (talk) 18:15, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A higher level of evidence is needed to add a new fact to Wikipedia than to remove a dubious fact. Your search for evidence of the Ysolo festival probably justifies its removal from List of harvest festivals, but it does not justify its inclusion here as a hoax. We would need to cite a source to confirm that it is a hoax. Your USGS source [4] cites this blog. This would not be a good source for Wikipedia. Verbcatcher (talk) 18:56, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, and I am not planning to introduce it here without a reliable source. I am only bringing it to your attention as an item of possible interest. —Mark Dominus (talk) 21:13, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]