Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Illegal Activities (Animals) Act 1875


 * 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   delete. Courcelles 01:51, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Illegal Activities (Animals) Act 1875

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Article ineligible for prod due to previous prod in 2007. Completely unreferenced article that has been tagged as a hoax. Hansard comes up with no mention of this Act. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 14:28, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * "speedy delete": Under G3 as a blatant hoax — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morgankevinj public (talk • contribs) 1 November 2010
 * Delete as hoax - no source cited, none found, fails WP:V. JohnCD (talk) 19:42, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete Concur with above. If this was a real act of parliament, a search of Google Books or Google News Archive would come up with something. Safe to say it doesn't. Catfish Jim   &#38; the soapdish  23:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete = no refs The Eskimo (talk) 15:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The UK Statute Law Database doesn't have it in either the A–Z index or the list for 1875. Uncle G (talk) 11:37, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, that only means it wasn't in force in 1991 (see ). For example, you won't find the Offences against the Person Act 1875 in the Statute Law Database, but that doesn't make that Act a hoax. Gabbe (talk) 11:43, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Please point to the part of my sentence where I said that this made it a hoax.  That's your argument.  I merely added another datum of where this had been looked for and not found, so that the holes in the Swiss Cheese don't all line up. Uncle G (talk) 12:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * But you do find references to the Offences against the Person Act 1875 in the Hansard database, e.g. here (top entry) is its second reading on April 14, 1875, whereas you don't find this; in my book that makes it a hoax. Also, you find the Offences against the Person Act in a general Google search, whereas the general Google search results for this, where they have any content, are all in the same form of words as ours, and are clearly mirrors or copies. It is alarming how rapidly misinformation that gets into WP is propagated across the Internet. JohnCD (talk) 13:38, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * We haven't quite proved the Act doesn't exist, but the onus is ultimately on the article creator to prove the Act does exist. Delete as unverified. This is one of the reasons why I've never been too happy with WP's practice of allowing uncited information in. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 18:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hansard is the official record of the proceedings of Parliament. If there is no record there of this Act in the year it is supposed to have been passed, that is pretty conclusive proof it never existed. Not that that matters - as you say, fails WP:V anyway. JohnCD (talk) 18:52, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.