Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Merhoff Post

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. The lesson here is that just because something in an article has a little blue number after it, it doesn't mean it's correct. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:08, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merhoff Post

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

WP:HOAX I believe this article, and the related website were created to legitimize the use of "The Merhoff Post" in a spate of Puerto Rico-related hoax and vandalism articles created by the sock farms of Plastic Beach and Horizontal Law. The "Merhoff Post" has often been used in citations to these hoax articles, and up until 17 June 2011 (see this edit) contained almost no content whatsoever. What content it contains now is a wild collection of random blog posts copied from other sites on the net. (Compare this page of the site to this article in The Village Voice, or this page to Thomas Pynchon's Against the Day (as quoted here)). Anyone can throw up a website these days. Clearly, this one is not a legitimate news source. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:58, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. —• Gene93k (talk) 16:39, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 16:40, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as hoax. The website has only been in existence a short while, since the Wayback Machine has not yet started to archive it: it would show up if the site had been in existence since September 2010 as claimed. Also, not known to Google News, Scholar and Books. Just 64 hits on Google Web, characteristic of something created a day or two ago. Sergeant Cribb (talk) 16:59, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looks like it has all the signs of a hoax. Qrsdogg (talk) 15:39, 20 June 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.