Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Office for Entrepreneurs' Relief


 * 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   Speedy delete as hoax (G3).. - Vianello (Talk) 07:54, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Office for Entrepreneurs&

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

This is a hoax. "Entrepreneurs' Relief" is a real concession in the UK tax system, but this office does not exist.

An elaborate website has been set up for it. Some kind of scam? It is plausible-looking, though the stock pictures of happy smiling people are reminiscent of other fake websites I have seen, rather than the more severe text-only approach usual with UK Government sites.

Large chunks of the website have been copied from the sites of other government departments like BERR, HMRC and the CPS. For example:

If that is not enough, consider: The author edited only during February, mainly this article and links to it. Congratulations to BasilSorbie and Shake45 who spotted the hoax. Delete. JohnCD (talk) 20:34, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * CPS website: "The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is a national organisation with offices across the whole of England and Wales. The CPS is structured into 42 areas that are sub-divided into 14 regional area groups with a Complex Casework Unit situated within each group."
 * OER website "The Office for Entrepreneurs' Relief (OER) is a national organisation with offices across the whole of England and Wales. The OER is structured into 42 areas that are sub-divided into 14 regional area groups with a Complex Casework Unit situated within each group."
 * The OER gets 108 Ghits, compare over 2 million for Business Link, a real agency in the same line of business, and 362,000 for the CPS.
 * Most of those Ghits are WP or mirrors or its own website.
 * Direct.gov.uk, the UK government web portal, has not heard of it.
 * BERR, its supposed parent department, has not heard of it.
 * Two of the references in the article are its own web-site; the other three do not mention it.
 * UK Government agency websites end ".gov.uk" not ".org.uk".
 * G3 per above. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 20:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as hoax per nom. Good job, John, Basil, and Shake. Deor (talk) 20:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Hoax, very probably phishing or other forms of disreputable behaviour. Speedy if possible (G3/G11)?  We don't have a CSD (apart from G9) that obviously covers this sort of thing, unfortunately. Tevildo (talk) 20:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete It clearly claims to be a government agency in the article but there are ZERO reliable references on the internet and the website address is a .org.uk not .gov.uk. Drawn Some (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * G3 it, now, before it adds web-traffic to the target site.— S Marshall  Talk / Cont  22:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Confirmed by email from BERR. ninety:one 23:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Hoaxalicious. Recommend Salt as well. Edward321 (talk) 00:45, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The article claims that the organisation . . . has received high-level commitment from the Prime Minister but the Gordon Brown document referenced in support not only does not verify the claim, it does not even mention the term "Entrepeneur's Relief". This cannot be speedied as several have asked as hoaxes are specifically excluded from the G3 criteria.  However, I would support an early close to this debate due to the possibility that this is a scam.  Sp in ni  ng  Spark  00:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hoaxes are specifically excluded from G1 but not from G3; they are frequently deleted under the latter criterion as "blatant and obvious misinformation." Deor (talk) 02:02, 2 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.