Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baron Cruse-Cohen

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. I know the AfD hasn't run a full course, but it doesn't have to - in this case, the hoaxes should be eliminated immediately. m.o.p 05:35, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Baron Cruse-Cohen

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

These three articles are hoaxes. There are various false claims that can be checked, e.g. that Sir David was a Privy Councillor or that Jean Alexandre Cohen (in early versions of his article) was Mayor of Charlotte, NC, but the basic point is that there is no such title as "Baron Cruse-Cohen". I have checked Debrett (the only source cited) and, also thepeerage.com. This AfD is a start on clearing a tangled web of hoaxes and misinformation inserted by a group of users, mainly throwaway accounts which edit on only one day, but one longer-running account and two IPs which appear to be static and which it may be possible to block. Credit to JoannaSerah (talk) and Vivisel (talk) who flagged these and have done considerable work on checking them out. JohnCD (talk) 20:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all as hoaxes,per nominator's statement that the one reference did not substantiate the claims. I found nothing about these at Google Books. Edison (talk) 20:56, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:28, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all as (rather sophisticated) hoaxes. Thank you JohnCD for kicking this off. I've spent a fair amount of time combing through this stuff - it is fascinating and bizarre, but these three pages are definitely fake. For more information, please see this page, which I created to track the fakery. Vivisel (talk) 23:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.