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.
From
[1]: "[
Norman D. Stevens ] enjoys being a prankster. He delights in obtaining listings for the [Molesworth] institute or staff members, including himself, Nigel Molesworth, and Timothy Peason, in standard reference books [...] Stevens published an entry on the Molesworth Institute on Wikipedia. The Wikipedia editors questioned some of the information and added to the page an external link to an 'article citing hoax in Who's Who in Library Servies as the source of the name Molesworth.'"
Comment If this hoax has been covered in in reliable sources (such as the one discussed by HaeB); then this could still be worthy of an article, with potentially a move to Molesworth Institute hoax. Otherwise a listing at
WP:HOAXLIST would of course be appropriate (as this would then become the most enduring hoax there...).
RandomCanadian (
talk /
contribs) 02:59, 5 July 2020 (UTC) blocked as sockpuppet
~ Amkgp💬14:07, 17 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep The subject passes
Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline with the sources presented in this discussion and additional sources I found and added to the article. I
rewrote the article to remove promotional material and to make it clear that the Molesworth Institute is a fictional institute, not a real institute.
Comment I removed a couple paragraphs that were written from an "in-universe" perspective (taking the hoax as fact). What remains might better be treated at
Norman D. Stevens. On the other hand, the description in The Laughing Librarian is pretty extensive, so it's possible the article could be built back up again, making more clear what's part of the joke.
XOR'easter (
talk)
17:41, 9 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment:Britishfinance (
talk·contribs),
Balle010 (
talk·contribs), and
XOR'easter (
talk·contribs), I have further expanded the article with information from the sources (though there is much more content that can be added from The Laughing Librarian). The article says, "The Molesworth Institute is a fictional organization started with the aim of furthering library comedy", so it's not misleading readers into thinking it might be a real institute as it had been before. I am fine with renaming to
Molesworth Institute (hoax library) if that changes editors' positions, but would adding a disambiguator to the title be compliant with the
Wikipedia:Disambiguation guideline given that the current title does not "refe[r] to more than one subject covered by Wikipedia"?
Keep It's properly cited with links to notable peer-reviewed journals. Almost a library industry cultural phenomenon at this point, it ceased being a "prank" years ago. From what I understand it's the equivalent of the "Who's On First" sketch to the library world.
Oaktree b (
talk)
03:20, 11 July 2020 (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.
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.
From
[1]: "[
Norman D. Stevens ] enjoys being a prankster. He delights in obtaining listings for the [Molesworth] institute or staff members, including himself, Nigel Molesworth, and Timothy Peason, in standard reference books [...] Stevens published an entry on the Molesworth Institute on Wikipedia. The Wikipedia editors questioned some of the information and added to the page an external link to an 'article citing hoax in Who's Who in Library Servies as the source of the name Molesworth.'"
Comment If this hoax has been covered in in reliable sources (such as the one discussed by HaeB); then this could still be worthy of an article, with potentially a move to Molesworth Institute hoax. Otherwise a listing at
WP:HOAXLIST would of course be appropriate (as this would then become the most enduring hoax there...).
RandomCanadian (
talk /
contribs) 02:59, 5 July 2020 (UTC) blocked as sockpuppet
~ Amkgp💬14:07, 17 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep The subject passes
Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline with the sources presented in this discussion and additional sources I found and added to the article. I
rewrote the article to remove promotional material and to make it clear that the Molesworth Institute is a fictional institute, not a real institute.
Comment I removed a couple paragraphs that were written from an "in-universe" perspective (taking the hoax as fact). What remains might better be treated at
Norman D. Stevens. On the other hand, the description in The Laughing Librarian is pretty extensive, so it's possible the article could be built back up again, making more clear what's part of the joke.
XOR'easter (
talk)
17:41, 9 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment:Britishfinance (
talk·contribs),
Balle010 (
talk·contribs), and
XOR'easter (
talk·contribs), I have further expanded the article with information from the sources (though there is much more content that can be added from The Laughing Librarian). The article says, "The Molesworth Institute is a fictional organization started with the aim of furthering library comedy", so it's not misleading readers into thinking it might be a real institute as it had been before. I am fine with renaming to
Molesworth Institute (hoax library) if that changes editors' positions, but would adding a disambiguator to the title be compliant with the
Wikipedia:Disambiguation guideline given that the current title does not "refe[r] to more than one subject covered by Wikipedia"?
Keep It's properly cited with links to notable peer-reviewed journals. Almost a library industry cultural phenomenon at this point, it ceased being a "prank" years ago. From what I understand it's the equivalent of the "Who's On First" sketch to the library world.
Oaktree b (
talk)
03:20, 11 July 2020 (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.