Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Horng fong
- 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. Sam Walton (talk) 00:15, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Horng fong
- Horng fong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unverifiable, probably an 8-year old hoax (if so, would be one of the older entries on Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia).
Looking for Horng Fong gives not a single result which is older than the Wikipedia article, and all (few) more recent ones seem to be based on our article.
Looking for it in the sources gives no results: Sanderson, Speake. The external link[1] also yields no results. The article linked can be found at [2] but again, nothing about this cryptid.
Fram (talk) 14:02, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
]
- Delete - I searched and found nothing authoritative or that appears to pre-date the Wikipedia article.
- A text called "The Esoteric Codex: Cryptozoology" which purports to be "curated articles regarding cryptozoology" appears to contain the same content as the Wikipedia article. The text does not indicate whether the Wikipedia article is the source. However, the date listed for the "codex" (9 Apr 2015) is much later than the Wikipedia article's creation date (2 Nov 2008) so presumably the "Codex" article is based on the Wikipedia article. Either that or both articles are based on a third article and then the Wikipedia article is a copyright violation. This "Codex" lists one external link, http://geology.com/news/2008/pygmy-dinosaur-inhabited-bristols-tropical-islands.shtml, which is a dead link. However the URL suggests that the geology.com article was created the same year as the Wikipedia artice. This suggests a hoax. The "Codex" lists one reference, http://books.google.com/books?id=on2ShbwVzp4C, but that apparently is for the front cover and not the content.
- No matches for "horng" were found during a search of either the Sanderson book at https://books.google.com/books?id=W2bPAAAAMAAJ or the Speake book at https://books.google.com/books?id=on2ShbwVzp4C.--Rpclod (talk) 14:53, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as apparent hoax. In addition to the other evidence above, note that this article is the creator's only-ever contribution to Wikipedia, which in the case of a suspected hoax is always a very bad sign. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:02, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per above. Found this very serious publication, but it mirrors this article. — Gamall Wednesday Ida (t · c) 17:04, 23 December 2016 (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.