Talk:Fictitious entry/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
I suppose the google bing affair does qualify. Google added fake keywords that pointed to search results and bing copied 9 out of 100 [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.132.3.10 (talk) 04:19, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Oxford Companion to English Literature
I remember hearing Margaret Drabble interviewed, some years ago, probably on BBC Radio 4, about the latest edition of the Oxford Companion to English Literature. Margaret Drabble was being interviewed because she was the editor of this latest edition. I was taken aback to hear her say that the OCEL contained a fictitious entry, to combat plagiarism. My immediate thought was, "How can you trust a reference work which contains a false entry?"Rvam1378 (talk) 12:46, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
clarity and sections
I added two clear sections to this page to emphasize the difference between fictitious entries that are practical jokes and fictitious entries that are copyright traps. I also added a few subsections within those sections, and a third section to talk about fiction about fictitious entries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asianflavoure (talk • contribs) 15:31, 4 October 2018 (UTC)