Talk:Cockerton

hoax coverage
Just a note, the hoax in this article about a Flyover received some coverage before it was removed:

--Rob (talk) 04:20, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Flyover hoax
Will you please stop removing the flyover hoax, it is a valid part of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.3.231.84 (talk) 17:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * As I have told 86.3.231.84 on their talk page, I feel that the hoax paragraph should be drastically shortened. It is way too long compared to the rest of the article. Too much attention is presently being given to a single trivial incident. Gail (talk) 21:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I have forwarded this incident to the administrators' noticeboard. Anyone involved, please feel free to comment at Wikipedia:ANI#Cockerton. Gail (talk) 21:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Just a note that a comparable thing happened to Denshaw. It might be worth looking at how that article benefitted from the attention, and also how it deals with its own news. --Jza84 | Talk  23:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)