This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Latest comment: 1 year ago4 comments2 people in discussion
@Benmite, I plan on expanding this page substantially and taking it to GA should there be enough content out there. As page creator, you may have a better grasp of the sources out there. Any idea on the reliability of museum of hoaxes source? I can see this source is used fairly widely elsewhere wikipedia, even if its a bit unorthodox.
@Etriusus: I've actually been a bit concerned about this page, since I worry that it suffers from recentism. That might sound strange since I created it, but I only barely noticed upon creating the page that 5 out of the 7 sources I used are from the same two days, and only one of the sources isn't from 2008. Even that one, from 2009, heavily relies on an article from what I believe is that same two-day timespan. Even the Museum of Hoaxes article is from a day before those articles all came out. (Also, I would caution against using the Museum of Hoaxes, since, from what I can tell, it's a self-published blog.) Have you found any additional sources outside of that? If not, I might propose a merge into a different article, though I'm not sure which one yet. benǝʇᴉɯ19:55, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Benmite I made an effort to find something more substantial but nothing reliable comes up. I think that a merge is going to be the best option, there are only 4-5 sources that are somewhat reliable. The Buzzfeed citation is bare-bones with minimal information, the Gawker citation isn't particularly good, and I'm unsure about the WFMU citation. There's one google book that cites this event at any length. I can expand the page but I feel that the effort would be largely futile. I did go ahead and de-orphan the page. Maybe List of hoaxes can host a mention of 90 Day Jane, I just don't see the page as viable per WP:NOTE. Etrius ( Us)02:13, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
