User talk:Shii/Hoaxes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Rope Theory

I can't find a deletion page, but wasn't there once an article on an expansion of string theory called Rope Theory? Lurker 14:37, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

It's not in the deleted archive. Ashibaka tock 22:42, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beans

Deep in my gut I get a bad feeling about this page. Durova 15:33, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, it might encourage Herostratus. —Quarl (talk) 2006-03-21 17:30Z
The thing is, people already do this anyway. I felt we needed a central archive so we can see what kind of articles get vandalized, and what to look for. Ashibaka tock 22:42, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Formating

Bravo! But this format extends under the left-hand links in some skins. Septentrionalis 16:38, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry... I will try to re-format. Ashibaka tock 22:42, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hoax band

All the relevant articles have been deleted, but I recall them being around for quite some time before the band and its albums were discovered as a hoax. See here. An admin could take a look at it and find out the length/dates/notes info. --Fang Aili 16:22, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Like most hoaxes, it was detected within a few hours. Thanks for suggesting it, though! Ashibaka tock 22:42, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New hoax: Gordon Balera

My friend and me was just kidding. We are wrote this article. This is just a hoax test in hungarian wikipedia. Next time we will not writing hoax article. Cheers. Nyikita 10:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Indochine ?

I don't see what is a hoax on Indochine page (the band exists, the french film exists, and "the French name for Indochina" exists i must say i 'm french but my english allready told it :p

[edit] Croatia Polytechnic

This bit of nonsense has been around since February. --Fang Aili talk 19:49, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Michel Le Gray

Recently deleted, but it was subtle enough. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michel Le Gray. Lasted a few months. Admin will need to check for exact dates. Hoaxers still at large, admin will need to check history for that as well. heqs 09:36, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nihilartikel

Can that really be considered a hoax article? Granted it had a made-up name, but the concept it addressed is clearly not a hoax. I'd have to say that was a genuine article, titled with a neologism. - Bootstoots 19:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tuba (mythology)

I think it's a hoax. see talk page. Udi Raz 22:28, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Arminian Tokgrum enclave in Azerbijan

[[1]]

14 days. --86.25.51.168 13:19, 18 March 2007 (UTC) (March 3- 17).

A fake nation created by User: Lilidor. It’s mentioned on [[2]] --86.29.255.68, so the hoax is caching on. 12:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC) It's still going on.--86.29.253.15 19:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

And on these pages-

[[3]]

[[4]] --86.29.254.174

[[5]]

--86.29.254.174 20:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Estonian National Movement

A small group with that name does exist, but has nothing to do with this article, which is a clever hoax. 193.40.5.245 12:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

|- | 8 months already | August 2006 - (May 2007 ???) | Fictitious Estonian political party |-

[edit] Just added: Lustfaust

Lustfaust survived for 21 months, before User:Spazure spotted the problem and AfD'd it. But because the hoax had been debunked in reliable sources, a couple of us decided to rewrite the article instead of let it be deleted. Notably, the NYT article on the subject (used in the new version's references) commented that Wikipedia had fallen for the hoax, but nobody bothered fixing it. JulesH 17:35, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aliquota

Just found this one, and hopefully it's deleted before its upcoming one-year anniversary (created 2006-10-19). Looks like a chemist in-joke with borrowed information about lions. J. Spencer 19:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What counts as a hoax?

Does it have to be originated by the article creators? What if it comes from a book written in 1930, which is universally considered a hoax by people familiar with it, but some "facts" from which have seeped out into the popular consciousness (because some people believed it in 1930), occasionally appearing unattributed as "obscure" information in modern writings.--Pharos (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Well I when I call an article a hoax, I mean that its contents are 100% invention, & did not exist before the original author or authors wrote the Wikipedia article. An example is General Florentius, which was a plausible name but entirely fictitious article. There are a numberof existing articles about famous hoaxes like Orson Welles' "The War of the Worlds" radio broadcast or Spaghetti trees. -- llywrch (talk) 20:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The article was not about a hoax per se; it repeated an extremely obscure hoax which appeared in a secondary source unattributed to its first published source (which, if the name of the first published source had been known, any google search could turn up as a hoax), and which the original article creator added in good faith.--Pharos (talk) 07:15, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Possible hoax at Aría?

I just happened to come across Aría. It is now a redirect but, according to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aría, was deleted as a hoax. Any admin want to look into how long the article has been around?  :-) --Iamunknown 04:55, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Lasted 8 days. Gimmetrow 00:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Old hoax

Came here from WP:HOAX. In 2006 I discovered a prank/hoax that had existed in an article since 2001. Although the page grew considerably over the years, when the misinformation was originally added, it made up half the text. This is not some obscure page, either; it routinely gets more than 5k hits per day. Is that worth listing here? Gimmetrow 04:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Apollo 11? Why don't you mention it here (on the talk page) first? Ayla (talk) 11:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
[6] [7] [8] Gimmetrow 00:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
That sure did escape detection for a long time... It's hard to perform any googling on the subject since mirrors have propagated the (mis)information to the rest of the web. I did find one related untainted source, but it does not shed any light on the veracity of the claims made. My reservation is that it might have been some obscure research, rather than a hoax; the main argument against that seems to be that Boston-based John Garabedian is a "radio personality and disc jockey" rather than a researcher. But if you add it to the list (as the longest-running hoax, at that), maybe we could get someone offering more insight on the matter. Ayla (talk) 19:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I'm quite sure it was a hoax, or probably more accurately described, a college prank. "Extensive studies" would not correspond to obscure research. This text survived over 1000 revisions before it was discovered. Another name associated with this text had an article which survived for a few days short of five years, but had very few edits and was probably rarely viewed. Gimmetrow 01:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Matt Jaeger? Yes, the hoax probably deserves a mention in the list then. Ayla (talk) 11:12, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Grand Unified Conspiracy Theory

This isn't really a hoax, but a non-notable topic. The term was in use on the Internet prior to the article being written. <eleland/talkedits> 20:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)