Wikipedia talk:Cuckoo editing

WikiFauna
Perhaps someone could create a wikifauna, "cuckoo" which are the editors that do the "cuckoo-ing"? This might make no sense at all, just an idea. SnazzyInfinity (talk • contribs) 16:32, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey Thanks for the pointer, I reckon I'll just have to do that... :) --DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:54, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

WP:Don't hijack references
's edit has reminded me of the existence of WP:Don't hijack references. Perhaps these two essays should be merged? Cordless Larry (talk) 17:33, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Fair, that seems like an entirely reasonable proposal. As long I get to retain trademark and associated rights to Cuckoo™️ editing, obvs. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:18, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you have any thoughts on this, ? Cordless Larry (talk) 09:01, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I approve and wish I'd thought of the cuckoo comparison myself! - The Bushranger One ping only 09:08, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Possible example?
This essay reminded me of some edits on a page I was reading the other day, and I think they might qualify as examples of cuckoo editing. On the article for Ed Seykota, a list of students was expanded multiple times, hijacking two existing citations. I'm not sure it totally fits, because the new content was inserted before the already sourced content (e.g. The moon is made of cheese and is the only natural satellite [3]) but I thought I'd mention it here. There are probably better examples out there, but it's something. SreySros (talk) 20:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I'd say that's definitely in the cuckoo territory! Whether the cuckoo lays its egg between the parents and their own egg, or on the other side (which is a relative concept anyway) of the latter, the end result is the same. Your example is particularly stealthy, because a list like that can very easily be grown without anyone noticing. Thanks, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:25, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Another example
Just saw an example of cuckoo editing in the wild as I was doing some WP:RCP and thought you'd like to know. Feel free to include in the article if you want! Qtaa (talk) 12:08, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ooh, that's a beauty! :) Even managed to move the ref down a paragraph or two - not just to the other side of the nest, but to a different forest altogether. Good catch, and thanks for calling WP:CUCKOOing by its proper name. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 21:11, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hahaha... Truly to a different forest! I saw your essay a day or two ago and thought it was the perfect name for something like this. Know that I will be putting it in my edit descriptions where appropriate in the future. It's a great term deserving of more recognition from the community. :) Qtaa (talk) 21:34, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Is this considered?
While looking at an user's contribs I noticed this and this which I think as a pair could be considered.  SnazzyInfinity (chat? • what I've done) 18:11, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi I must be having a thick moment (in my defence, only on my first cup of coffee...), I don't quite understand what the point of those two edits was. Then again, if they were intended to deceive, the plan clearly worked! Be that as it may, cuckoos do come in many species (I was going to say flavours, but I don't know that they're edible), and this could well be a representative of the lesser-spotted ones. :) Cheers, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:27, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, they change the phrase "often cited as one of the greatest rappers of all time" to "He is considered one of the greatest rappers of all time"; basically changing the point of the sentence from "some official sources call him one of the greatest rappers" to "everyone thinks he is one of the greatest rappers" which is breaking WP:NPOV, and is using the same ref, which isn't necessarily cuckoo-ing but completely replacing the original quote and now that I think about it this may or may not be cuckooing but given this run on sentence I should go have my first cup of coffee, cheers!  SnazzyInfinity (chat? • what I've done) 16:21, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, got it now, thanks. I think that is defo cuckooing, and quite sneaky ninja-level at that! It's basically the cuckoo chucking the original egg overboard, then laying its own egg, and painting it to look so similar to the original that a casual passer-by wouldn't notice any difference. Devious. Well spotted! :) --DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:47, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Possible example, could be out on a limb (or branch)
Hello again! After a brief break from wikipedia, I have returned in search of cuckoos, after an hour or so of bird watching the recent changes in desperation to catch a glimpse of the elusive cuckoo, I believe I may have found one! seems to add an what seems to be insignificant note/comment using the ref to back them up? Perhaps I've merely found a cuckoo lookalike, or I'm hallucinating cuckoos now. Regardless, fun project as always, and maybe add some of the previous examples others have found to the example section of the main article, for it is sadly bare.  SnazzyInfinity (chat? • what I've done) 16:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Whoa, nothing limb or branch about it, that is a prime example of cuckooing, if I ever saw one, and right amidst the cuckoo courting season (in the northern hemisphere, at least), too. It's a good 'un. :) Many thanks for your continued bird-spotting efforts, which are very much appreciated. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Great! Glad it was, not as traditional as others that may try to convey a fact though. Thank you very much!  SnazzyInfinity (chat? • what I've done) 13:45, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Another!
'Twas but the first edit I checked off of the recent changes that I found this, quite the bird! Would you like me to put some of the previous examples on this plant page on the main page on the example section? There are quite a few on the talk now but as I said the main page is looking quite bare sadly. Unrelated, perhaps someone could make a "Birdwatcher" userbox or something of the matter. Anyways, back to birdwatching. Cheers!  SnazzyInfinity (chat? • what I've done) 19:42, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Update, they got a source, you may still consider the latter half of my message though.  SnazzyInfinity (chat? • what I've done) 19:44, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Broader definition?
In many cases, I have come across editors adding content with references that supposedly back up the content but appears to be random, non-existent, or that suggest the opposite. I think this can also be referred to as WP:CUCKOO, because it also disguises unverifiable material. Aintabli (talk) 16:13, 17 April 2023 (UTC)


 * This is a mix of what some mathematicians refer to as "proof by ghost reference" and "proof by wishful citation". Renerpho (talk) 00:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

A new variant?
There's a variant that may be interesting, an example of which I stumbled upon a few months ago. I remembered it when I read your essay. I describe the case here. What may be interesting about it is that it didn't hijack an existing citation, but was inserted between two paragraphs that both had an existing [citation needed] tag, thereby making itself look reliable in comparison. It worked, as it stood (almost) unchallenged for about 13 years, during which it was copied into the corresponding article in about half a dozen other language wikis. The information also made it into a few seemingly reliable third-party sources, which could have been added as well-disguised WP:CIRCULAR references at any time. Renerpho (talk) 07:12, 10 September 2023 (UTC) And yes, I found this essay after I tagged you elsewhere and decided to read your user page. I hope you don't mind... Renerpho (talk) 07:15, 10 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Ah, the cuckoo is clearly evolving new strategies to procreate and prosper. Thanks @Renerpho! -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:29, 10 September 2023 (UTC)