Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Mexican Congress alien corpses display

2023 Mexican Congress alien corpses display

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

2023 Mexican Congress alien corpses display (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fringey and covered in Jaime Maussan already, this does not deserve its own article. Slatersteven (talk) 17:45, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

• Delete and redirect to Jaime Maussan to be included with his other similar claims. No standalone notability aside from WP:RECENTISM WP:SENSATIONAL coverage. Rename as "Peruvian alien mummy hoax (or hoaxes)", per VdSV9 and 5Q5. Rewrite using all the RS we have regarding all the Peruvian "alien mummies" hoaxed to date. - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:54, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
• Soft keep: A hearing of a legislative body can meet notability guidelines. I'd like to see if there is some more lasting coverage (WP:SUSTAINED) or more hearings before deleting. I do want to note that all of the current sourcing is mostly American coverage in English and we have 0 sourcing from Mexican sources so some expansion with coverage from the country involved would probably be good. If there is no WP:SUSTAINED or expansion of the page with other sources, I may be persuaded to change to a delete vote in a few days. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:06, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

We can always recreate it. Slatersteven (talk) 18:09, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

I mean sure, I guess that's an editing philosophy difference. We can give it a few days to see if the article develops or we could delete now and recreate if the sourcing emerges later. I don't have strong preferences here, just the opinion a legislative hearing that makes international headlines may be able to meet WP:GNG. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:14, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

The problem is, this is not about the hearing, but one aspect of it. Slatersteven (talk) 11:15, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

• Delete, and redirect to the Maussan bio where the context is clearer. There is clearly not going to be sustained discussion regarding the 'corpses' that doesn't centre on Maussan. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:22, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Paranormal and Mexico. Shellwood (talk) 18:37, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
• Comment/Question: Given that this article was translated to create Exhibición de cadáveres de extraterrestres en México de 2023, do we need to do anything extra to make sure a version history is preserved to show the version that the Spanish article was translated from? I haven't participated in an AfD with a live translation on another Wiki before so was just curious if there was anything additional we have to do because of it. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 19:59, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
  • If you are worried, you can list the usernames over at the other language's page. That should satisfy the terms of CC-BY. jps (talk) 20:13, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

    Okay, I'll do that if the article is AfD'ed. Just noting the author here since the article history will be deleted:Ainty Painty.

    Also, if anyone knows how to save just one version of the article history at AfD, it looks like it was translated from this version (judging from the time of publication of the Spanish version). TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 20:48, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

• Delete as WP:SENSATION. jps (talk) 20:12, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
• Redirect to Jaime Maussan as WP:SENSATION Parham wiki (talk) 20:24, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
• Redirect per above. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
• Redirect This is part of a long pattern of hoaxing by Maussan, and it makes sense to group this in with his other hoaxes. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:49, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
• Keep—unless this display is confirmed as another stunt from Maussan, keep the article up until there's actual confirmation that the corpses are fake (per WP:WAIT and WP:N). - MateoFrayo (talk) 20:24, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

The corpses are fake. This is another stunt from Maussan. These are some of the same bodies that have been shown in the past. VdSV9•♫ 00:53, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Unless you have a source that actually confirms it, then it shouldn't be renamed/redirected. - MateoFrayo (talk) 01:46, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Well the National Autonomous University of Mexico has stated his claims make no sense, and they only tested the sample they were sent for carbon 14 dating and nothing else. So he is lying about that (for a start). Slatersteven (talk) 10:58, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree the guy's a notorious conman, don't get me wrong—but following Wikipedia policy, unless there's confirmation that the corpses are fake, the article shouldn't be deleted. - MateoFrayo (talk) 19:35, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

The article's not up for deletion because the corpses are fake or not fake, the authenticity of supposed alien bodies doesn't apply to this AfD. (And anyway we now have a preponderance of RS that say it is one more in a long line of fakes) The AfD question is, do we need both a bio of Maussan *and* an article about his claims that duplicates the same material in both. (And the default is not "alien until proven fake" - when other more simple explanations are more likely). - LuckyLouie (talk) 19:53, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately the majority of people on this forum, including myself, are suggesting renaming the article rather than keeping/not keeping it—regardless, I genuinely hope I'm not saying "alien real until otherwise fake"; what I am saying is that since current news outlets have yet to confirm whether or not the corpses are real, Wikipedia literally cannot (per WP:RB) simply say that they're fake, since that may be considered original research (even though the corpses probably are). - MateoFrayo (talk) 01:22, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

No reliable source has stated that the 'corpses' are real. 'News outlets' are not qualified to make such assertions, and accordingly aren't WP:RS if they do. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

I suppose we can't say the "corpses" are real but we can't say they're fake either haha.

Also, news agencies (which are often cited by news outlets), such as Reuters and Associated Press, are "reliable for [basic] statements of fact." But that's not what I'm arguing—I'm arguing that Wikipedians do NOT decide if there are other explanations for something are more likely than something else. It's not our job to analyze the corpses or do interviews with Maussan, we simply just make articles from reliable sources.

However, since Wikipedia generally follows a consensus from its community, and there are always exceptions to everything, maybe we could rename the article title to include "hoax." I would still recommend that we Keep the Article & Wait For Further Confirmation From RS. - MateoFrayo (talk) 19:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Maybe I am missing something, but it seems to me like it is MateoFrayo who is. I didn't provide a link in my first response to you because one had already been added to the Maussan article and to this one, and several have been added since. There are plenty of articles, the Wired one, the Vox one, that explain exactly what I said above: that These are some of the same bodies that have been shown in the past. The AP link included in your last comment explains this. I'm finding it strange that, in the same comment where you include one RS explaining that this is another stunt from Maussan, you explain how we shouldn't do OR and need to rely on RS. VdSV9•♫ 00:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

• Rename to "Peruvian alien mummy hoax" or something along those lines and make it about the whole thing.VdSV9•♫ 00:55, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
• Rename, agree with editor VdSV9. Rewrite covering the earlier Peruvian "alien mummies" as well. Add to Mummy forgeries, List of hoaxes, List of UFO-related hoaxes (if appropriate), and Category:Hoaxes. Here's one source to justify: ABC News/AP: Scientists call fraud on supposed extraterrestrials presented to Mexican Congress Quote: In 2017, Maussan made similar claims in Peru, and a report by the country's prosecutor's office found that the bodies were actually "recently manufactured dolls, which have been covered with a mixture of paper and synthetic glue to simulate the presence of skin." The glue explains why no pins, screws, or wires show on the X-rays holding the bones tightly together. 5Q5|^✉ 12:23, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree the best way to handle this is combining all the RS to cite a renamed article that covers all the Peruvian mummy hoaxes - then deleting and merging Jaime Maussan into that article. - LuckyLouie (talk) 14:56, 18 September 2023 (UTC)