Talk:U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security visit Dartmouth student over library book

Incidently? Totalitarianism? Wow. By who. The FBI has been doing it for years.--Tomtom9041 20:46, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Its a pretty common theme in the tin-foil hat community, and people generally don't like it much. I wrote that sentence poorly, but my first attemp was worse.  :) Nyarlathotep 00:10, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

More sources

Anyone have anymore sources on this one? My initial instinct is it's bollocks. The student isn't identified; though the paper claims to know them. I suspect the profs are elaborating and feeding this to the paper. Anyone in the area willing to conduct a phone interview?

A Dartmouth Professor is a reliable source; here two are quoted. You could just fire off an email to one of the professors if you like; less work then a phone call. Heck, maybe he'd even edit the article himself. Nyarlathotep 00:10, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Does Wikinews prefer to promote hoaxes?

The original story, as reported in Wikinews on December 17, 2005, and as reported in Wikinews as I write this, is a hoax.

On December 24, I added text to this effect and added two newspaper sources:

New Bedfored Standard-Times: http://www.southcoasttoday.com/daily/12-05/12-24-05/a01lo719.htm Boston Globe: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/12/24/students_tall_tale_revealed?mode=PF

Within one hour, a Wikinews administrator reverted the page back to the original version. By taking this action, Wikipedia readers may incorrectly consider that this story is factual when it is based on a lie.

Unless a Wikinews administrator takes action to correct this hoax, it will appear that Wikinews prefers to promote hoaxes instead of facts.

It is our practice to preserve articles as published as much as possible. A small notice, with a link to the new article, would be most appropriate. When the new article detailing the hoax is published, I plan to add a one-line notice to the top of article explaining the hoax and linking to the new article. I hope this meets with your approval. --Chiacomo ^(talk) 22:12, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, we have our retraction someplace. I think it was doing pretty well, but it may not have been published yet. We should keep the article as is, but end with a one line tag-like italics blurb saying "this story was found to be based upon a hoax". Also, the word "lie" is POV and should be avoided. The word "hoax" is accurate. Nyarlathotep 04:00, 27 December 2005 (UTC)