Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Furr


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 03:21, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Joseph Furr

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article is tagged as a hoax. There is no mention of Joseph Furr in the cited pages of the article's reference Encyclopedia of Urban Legends (also no mention of a Joseph Furr anywhere else in this book). I have access to Informa's online archives and I viewed the full pdf for the reference "Mechanisms of Acute Human Poisoning by Pesticides"; it also includes no relevant information to substantiate the article. I can find no verifiable references to substantiate the subject's existence. Suggest deletion as unverifiable and a probable hoax. Muchness (talk) 17:08, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * G3 Blatant hoax. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete ate roaches in the summer of 73 but died in May 73? Looks hoax like to me Blue Square Thing (talk) 20:57, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete hoax. Drawn Some (talk) 21:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete hoax...I don't understand why this wasn't speedy deleted when first tagged?  Teapot  george Talk  21:54, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hoaxes are generally not speedy candidates unless they're "extreme cases of blatant and obvious hoaxes"; presumably the editor who removed the speedy tag felt the hoax was sufficiently elaborate or plausible to warrant a thorough investigation at AFD. --Muchness (talk) 22:20, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Editors still say "speedy" though here on AfD so hopefully it can be deleted without sitting around for a week. Drawn Some (talk) 22:36, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Using the boldfaced word doesn't make being a hoax a speedy deletion criterion, however many times the boldfaced word is used. Hoaxes are deleted for being unverifiable.  That is the part of deletion policy that actually applies to them, and it is not a speedy deletion criterion.  Unverifiability cannot be safely determined by just one or two pairs of eyes, as speedy deletion criteria are applied.  Muchness has done research.  But what AFD needs is for other editors to double-check this.  It does not need sheep votes, which are, basically, useless.  What research, for example, did you do to come to the conclusion that this is a hoax?  Your rationale mentions nothing at all.  AFD, and Wikipedia as a whole, needs you to do the legwork, so that we can have confidence in the conclusion that is come to. Uncle G (talk) 23:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Uncle G. I am the admin who removed the speedy deletion request from the article (three times now!).  The article is not "nonsense" nor is it "blatant" vandalism.  We have very specific speedy deletion criteria, and if an article doesn't fall within them, it doesn't fall within them, no matter how strongly you feel the article deserves deletion.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:02, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete A wikipedia hoax, not an urban legend hoax. Good call, a well referenced article but every ref is a hoax. These are hard to spot. See here for one of the ref,a nd no story there. Look here. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 14:46, 18 May 2009 (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.