Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hevstäf

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 After consultation with German and Czech wikipedians, including Martin-Vogel, RalfR, and Juan de Vojnikov, I conclude that this is definitely a hoax. Delete, delete all related images, consider blocking Zebraic as hoaxster. DS 00:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hevstäf

There is absolutely no record about the existence of this village, google shows nothing, maps of Czech Republic show nothing, there is no reference anywhere, even the transportation planner (idos.cz) doesn't know this place and I am pretty sure that town with 2,314 must have record and must be on the map (even smallers are). I think this is a pretty fine hoax. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 16:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Delete unless author or another fellow wikipedian provide reliable sources. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 16:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • No evidence?- this is a pretty old article, has no clean up or past discussion occurred? What is the evidence this is a hoax, as opposed to badly referenced? Unless someone has good evidence, this is way too early for deletion.- keep122.148.218.27 16:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Old article means nothing, there is no reference and it is not up the nominators or those who doubt to provide references. Provide reference that this town exists. Provide at least one official link with the reference, place on the map (maps.google.com, mapy.cz or some other). Also if you wish to participate I recommend you to create an account because IP votes has low or none weight. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 16:27, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I couldn't find anything trustworthy on the net, including Google books, for all the names mentioned, so it looks like a hoax to me. Certainly that doesn't prove it is one but the burden of proof lies with those who claimed it existed. Sciurinæ 16:34, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
It's a professional hoax. Here's the timeline:
  • 04:40, 12 October 2006 first edit
  • 23:47, 14 October 2006 Zebraic (Talk | contribs) uploaded "Image:Hevstaf CoatofArms.png" ‎ (Coat Of Arms for the town of Hevstaf in the Czech Republic. Public Domain/Fair Usage: A government logo; also, author died over 100 years ago.)
  • 07:48, 15 October 2006 article started
  • 08:06, 17 October 2006 in his user page text describing himself and his nickname, he notes: "Incubation. Reality forgery."
  • 22:39, 17 October 2006 renames this interest and asks for an article on Wikiality
  • 16:22, 18 October 2006 article created
  • 18:16, 20 October 2006 http://www.hevstaf.info was registered by "Stephen Doolittle"
  • 22:37, 20 October 2006 www.hevstaf.info was added to the article
  • 20:27, 10 September 2007 Stephen Doolittle was nominated for speedy deletion
  • 20:10, 10 September 2007 creates article in his userspace about Stephen Doolittle's work
  • 21:16, 10 September 2007 Stephen Doolittle article was deleted (I do not know when and by who it was created, but it was the said user who complained)
  • 00:01, 17 September 2007 Removes his note about "Incubation. Reality f rame." and writes about his experience of an explosion in Baltimore. In the deletion log of Stephen Dolittle one can read that this artist is living in Baltimore.
  • 16:14, 14 October 2007 this request for deletion was made
  • 18:08, 14 October 2007 notice of the deletion of Stephen Doolittle was removed.

I guess there was a gut feeling that this town didn't exist ... Sciurinæ 23:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment waiting to make up my mind - Neither of the websites cited, www.hevstaf.info and www.hevstaf.cz, exist (the former is a spam repository, while the latter simply does not exist). Things smell. Moreover, and I know this in itself would not mean anything, the article appears to have had a long gestation as a user page. Goochelaar 16:36, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
There were only two editors H (talk · contribs) and Zebraic (talk · contribs) the rest edits are replacements of Infobox, maintenance of bots and templates changes with no relation to the content of the article. H, the original author seems to be inactive for longer period and Zebraic seems to be active, so I posted info about this AfD to his talk page, waiting what he will bring here. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 16:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Are you sure H was the original author? His first edit says "moved here". Zagalejo^^^ 16:47, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
I am not sure what was the original place but starter here is him. Every town, city and even the smallest village is on the map here, so I can't believe this exists without any record anywhere. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 16:56, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Here's the context: User:Zebraic started it as his "first article" on his own User page. Few days later, H proposed to move it to its own sub-page instead and few minutes later did so (I don't think H plays any role here except for that). Some days later, Zebraic moved it into the article space but has kept a version, User:Zebraic/Hevstäf. He also created Image:Hevstafonthemap.jpg, Image:Hevstafi-coatofarmskavka.png and Image:Hevstaf Coatofarms-w-kavka.png. Sciurinæ 17:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I found the Dubs article on JSTOR. Skimming through it, I couldn't find any mention of Hevstaf or Hevstadt, although someone else might want to double check. Zagalejo^^^ 16:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I also recommend to delete coat of arms of this city, it doesn't look like a real coat of arms. See the different version here [1]. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 17:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep First, I have to apologize to anyone who has gotten involved in this "deletion" proposal, because it is not my intent to waste anyone's time. There are several things to consider about this article. First off this that [www.hevstaf.info] is more than a repository for spam; there's actual information there, and some tiny landscape photos. I suppose you must scroll down a bit to see past those horrid advertisements; the page was clearer when I first referenced it. Here's an excerpt from one of the links on the page, the link labeled zdroj informací (Which I believe means "information source"? Not sure.): "First written record comes from around 900 AD from court of Spyhtinev II, of Premyslids. However, folk of this region (not Region OFFICIAL, kraj) and archeological evidence shows that, if not in name, than in spirit has Hevstäf existed since beginning of the european history." This page is more than a spam repository; I feel it's a legitimate source. If you guys feel otherwise, there's nothing I can do about that. As for www.hevstaf.cz, I don't know. I know this bit looks bad, but I never noticed that it is gone. If you like, we may remove that source (although I never referenced it). I can't prove anything in regards to that site, but please believe me when I say, it was there when I began creating this entry.

Second: I am the only editor on this article? I suppose I am--I watch many of my contributions, and have seen little contributed to this article outside of my own edits. I am certainly the original creator for it. It strikes me as strange that I was the only one who ever really edited this article, but seeing as it pertains to a small town in the Czech Republic, it is understandable. As the only editor of this article, I can only defend myself, because, if it is a hoax, then it is a well-done hoax of which I was not aware. What I mean is, if it is a hoax, it exists independently and prior to this article, and I have merely been an unaware vehicle for its propagation in creating this article. If Hevstäf does not exist in any capacity (which at this point becomes an infinitely difficult thing to prove, and brings up more questions than it answers), then the "hoax" is severely, severely elaborate.

Third: Since I am the "sole author" of the article, I know the burden of proof lies on me. Has anyone looked up the books/articles I have referenced? Please look at these books: # Haywood, John (2005). Historical Atlas of Ancient Civilizations. London: Penguin Books, Ltd., 90-91. ISBN 0-141-01448-2.

  1. ^ Dubs, Homer H. (1941). "The misleading nature of Leibniz's Monadology". Philosophical Review 50 (5): 508-516. Cornell University. DOI:10.2307/2180622. ASIN B0007K0T9U. The town is mentioned in both. That should be enough to count as "verifiable".

Fourth: Again, as the "sole author", I'm very much aware of the implications of a hoaxed entry allegation. Please look at my contributions to Wikipedia. I am not the most active member, certainly, but I have made a considerable number of edits, none of which are hoaxes. Furthermore, please consider what I, or anyone, would hope to gain in creating a hoax such as the one you suspect is Hevstäf. I don't see it. What the Hell would the point be of such a hoax? And if I'm the "hoaxer", where are my other hoaxes? I suppose that that is a bit peripheral to the argument at hand. I just ask kindly that you consider it, because I fear that my user account and character are going to come directly under fire because of this.

Fifth: As I said on my talk page, I have visited the town. That counts as nothing, I know, so I implore those who live near the coordinates to go visit the map coordinates and see what you see. What you should see is a town there.

Sixth: The coat of arms image was originally created by; I had drawn it in my field book, and recreated it from my visit. The site, www.hevstaf.info, has more to say about the coat-of-arms and what it means (look in its gallery). I also created the map, from a public domain map of the Czech republic here on Wikipedia. By "created", I mean all that I did was put a little dot indicating the location of Hevstäf on a pre-created map of the Czech Republic. I did this for obvious reasons: To lend a visual aid to anyone who wanted to know where the town was. Many of these articles on little towns such as this have maps like this one! I don't deny any of this! But I thought that I had adequately referenced my sources. Zebraic 19:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

  • As I said above, I have access to the Dubs article, and I don't see the town mentioned anywhere. Are you sure that's the correct article? Zagalejo^^^ 19:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. No evidence, very probably a hoax revealed after long time. References about villages in the Czech Republic with the population of 50 persons are easily found on the internet. This "town" has more than 2,000 inhabitants and no evidence. Also no single mention in The Misleading Nature of Leibniz's Monadology which author cites. I have this article in PDF and can send to interested users. - Darwinek 20:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Suggestion: Zagalejo -- This article, unfortunately, has sourcing issues. I would suggest that, if you are attached to this article, you userify it and search for sources. - Che Nuevara 20:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Is this intended for Zebraic? Zagalejo^^^ 20:35, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
It looks as though it is intended for me. I can userify this if it gets out of hand. My problem here is that people would rather merely delete this instead of allowing me to userify it. They aren't looking at all the sources I've stated. The one source that you claim is wrong is not the original hard copy, but a PDF. The [www.hevstaf.info] is shown to contain more information on the town then many other "sources" used in many other Wiki articles I've seen. Zebraic 20:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Eradicate per WP:HOAX.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:33, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I have notified WP Czech Republik--Victor falk 21:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Nothing found also in the historical maps of Czech Republic (1836-1852) [2]. Have someone already tried its location 50°61′N 14°98′E ? It is location somewhere in Poland near the city Klecza, Lupki and Wlen. Zip code [3] not found, every city, town and village have one. No record at Town and cities of the Czech Republic [4]. This sounds like a definitive hoax for me. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 21:24, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 21:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete immediately - Have I stumbled upon this page before I would have deleted it immediately. It's obviously just a joke. – Caroig (talk) 22:10, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - Zebraic, don't you feel there is some of a contradiction in what you say, between "if it is a hoax, it exists independently and prior to this article, and I have merely been an unaware vehicle for its propagation in creating this article" (which would be the case if, say, you just heard or read about Hevstäf somewhere) and "I have visited the town"? Goochelaar 22:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
How so? I stated that, if it is a hoax, it is "severely, severely" elaborate. I have visited the town. But apparently it does not exist, according to all you. While we sit here talking about it, many of you state that it does not exist. There's the contradiction that I see. You cannot talk about something if it does not exist in some capacity or another. And I cannot prove that I visited this town some years back, so I am saying, IF IT IS A HOAX--Someone went to the trouble of creating a town, with this name, and giving it a history--THEN IT IS SEVERELY ELABORATE and either I am going insane, or I have implanted memories, or I don't exist in "real life". Zebraic 22:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
And I suppose it is an unfortunate coincidence that the domain hevstaf.info was registered on 20 October 2006 (see for instance here), the same day in which you put in the reference to this phantom site (see here)? Goochelaar 23:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Definitely hoax with spoofed source ... ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 23:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment The Czech language has no letter "ä".– sgeureka t•c 23:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
very good point. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 23:47, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, though calling it a deliberate hoax is perhaps incorrect - it appears that this has been set up as part of an arts project in an attempt, as Stephen puts it, to create a piece of metafiction. Though I can understand this aim which, in some ways, is laudable (I have seen many such instances of metafiction within art in my time as an arts reviewer and artist), I must stress that Wikipedia is not the place for such art. Though the intent was not to hoax anyone, that is the only possible outcome of this exercise if it is allowed to stay. Not only that, but by providing purely fictional information, it weakens the reputation of Wikipedia, and also Wikipedia's ability to provide information that is as reliable and accurate as possible. Stephen, though I can understand what you are trying to achieve here, it is not a wise course of action, any more than going into a bank with a toy gun and pretending to hold it up would be a wise form of performance art. I suggest you find some other, more appropriate, forum for your metafictional work. Grutness...wha? 01:02, 15 October 2007 (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.