 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
hoax coverage
editJust a note, the hoax in this article about a Flyover received some coverage before it was removed:
- Roberts, David (2008-06-10). "Officials say Wikipedia flyover rumours a hoax". The Northern Echo. Retrieved 2008-06-14.
{{cite news}}: Check date values in:|date=(help)
Flyover hoax
editWill you please stop removing the flyover hoax, it is a valid part of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.3.231.84 (talk) 17:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- As I have told 86.3.231.84 on their talk page, I feel that the hoax paragraph should be drastically shortened. It is way too long compared to the rest of the article. Too much attention is presently being given to a single trivial incident. Gail (talk) 21:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- I have forwarded this incident to the administrators' noticeboard. Anyone involved, please feel free to comment at Wikipedia:ANI#Cockerton. Gail (talk) 21:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Just a note that a comparable thing happened to Denshaw. It might be worth looking at how that article benefitted from the attention, and also how it deals with its own news. --Jza84 | Talk 23:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)