Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gregory Namoff

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 delete. NORTH AMERICA1000 19:16, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory Namoff (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)

This is a hoax. No references are supplied, and while searches find plenty of mirrors (including the same text translated into German and Italian), I have not been able to find any independent confirmation. Early versions said that he wrote a book called Namoffnomics, of which there is also no trace. The statement that he "ran for the US Senate against Bob Graham in 1998" can be checked and is false - see United States Senate election in Florida, 1998.

The article was created by an IP, back in 2005 when that was possible, and an early edit shows that the first version had categories copied from an article Jorge E. Rodriguez. That article was created the day before, also by a Florida-based BellSouth IP, and was also a hoax. JohnCD (talk) 16:59, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. JohnCD (talk) 16:59, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. JohnCD (talk) 16:59, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. JohnCD (talk) 17:05, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete How did this article last as long as it did? It is a hoax or very close to it. The claim of being part of the Watergate scandal made it easy to debunk. - Pmedema (talk) 20:15, 6 January 2015 (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.