A hoax (or, longstanding in-joke among some librarians) largely presented as fact. Questionable notability. HaeB (talk) 03:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
From : "[ Norman D. Stevens ] enjoys being a prankster. He delights in obtaining listings for the [Molesworth] institute or staff members, including himself, Nigel Molesworth, and Timothy Peason, in standard reference books [...] Stevens published an entry on the Molesworth Institute on Wikipedia. The Wikipedia editors questioned some of the information and added to the page an external link to an 'article citing hoax in Who's Who in Library Servies as the source of the name Molesworth.'"
Comment If this hoax has been covered in in reliable sources (such as the one discussed by HaeB); then this could still be worthy of an article, with potentially a move to Molesworth Institute hoax. Otherwise a listing at WP:HOAXLIST would of course be appropriate (as this would then become the most enduring hoax there...). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 02:59, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Keep The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline with the sources presented in this discussion and additional sources I found and added to the article. I rewrote the article to remove promotional material and to make it clear that the Molesworth Institute is a fictional institute, not a real institute.
Comment. Cunard, I could see a potential for it as Molesworth Institute (hoax library), and with the text re-written to reflect the true facts (there is some GNG for this), but as currently written, it is a hoax being presented as a fact (i.e. a real library)? thanks. Britishfinance (talk) 14:51, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 15:34, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Delete this is not the Molesworth Institute (hoax library) page. I'd favor creating that page. Balle010 (talk) 16:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Comment I removed a couple paragraphs that were written from an "in-universe" perspective (taking the hoax as fact). What remains might better be treated at Norman D. Stevens. On the other hand, the description in The Laughing Librarian is pretty extensive, so it's possible the article could be built back up again, making more clear what's part of the joke. XOR'easter (talk) 17:41, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for removing that in-universe material that took the hoax as fact. Cunard (talk) 11:04, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Comment:Britishfinance (talk·contribs), Balle010 (talk·contribs), and XOR'easter (talk·contribs), I have further expanded the article with information from the sources (though there is much more content that can be added from The Laughing Librarian). The article says, "The Molesworth Institute is a fictional organization started with the aim of furthering library comedy", so it's not misleading readers into thinking it might be a real institute as it had been before. I am fine with renaming to Molesworth Institute (hoax library) if that changes editors' positions, but would adding a disambiguator to the title be compliant with the Wikipedia:Disambiguation guideline given that the current title does not "refe[r] to more than one subject covered by Wikipedia"?
Weak Keep some of it is churnalism, but there's some coverage, including artnet and other art papers. I think it passes WP:ORG, barely StarM 20:10, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Star Mississippi, are you referring to this article by artnet? All that had to say about the subject is "Start your journey in the Miami Design District at Markowicz Fine Art, which is presenting new sculptures in the highly anticipated exhibition of French artist Alain Godon". How does that pass WP:ORG? Vexations (talk) 16:02, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Vexations I saw a couple more, that I will add if I can. Just didn't have a chance to in limited time online yesterday. It's thin, but I think it may just pass the barrier. StarM 19:29, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Comment, has been written up in news/magazines/sources but of MFA itself only appear to be mentions ie. "if you want to see .... go to MFA or .... can be seen/now showing at MFA" kind of words, where are the sources/articles that actually analyse the exhibitions/shows held there? Coolabahapple (talk) 15:31, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:54, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 17:36, 10 July 2020 (UTC)