| Revision as of 17:15, 26 March 2008 editAmagase~enwiki (talk | contribs)411 editsm →Shinichi Fujimura← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 13:52, 14 November 2024 edit undo137.59.145.78 (talk) →Primaxwork.com: new sectionTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit New topic | ||
| (101 intermediate revisions by 66 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{ |
{{Talk header}} | ||
| {{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|1= | ||
| {{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=High}} | |||
| {{Rational Skepticism|class=Start|attention=yes}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Business|importance=High|Accountancy=yes}} | |||
| So Uri Geller cannot be a fraud because he does not commit a crime? ] 04:26, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC) | |||
| {{WikiProject Law|importance=Top}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=mid|attention=}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Philosophy|importance=mid|ethics=yes}} | |||
| }} | |||
| {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|archiveprefix=Talk:Fraud/Archives/|format=Y|age=26297|index=yes|archivebox=yes|box-advert=yes}} | |||
| {{Broken anchors|links= | |||
| * <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#Fraud detection) has been ] before. <!-- {"title":"Fraud detection","appear":{"revid":70990296,"parentid":70989963,"timestamp":"2006-08-21T17:11:22Z","replaced_anchors":{"Predictive Analytics":"Predictive analytics","Direct Marketing":"Direct marketing","Cross-Sell":"Cross-sell","Customer Retention":"Customer retention","Collection Analytics":"Collection analytics","Fraud Detection":"Fraud detection","Portfolio, Product or Economy Level Prediction":"Portfolio, product or economy level prediction"},"removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":965857220,"parentid":965667266,"timestamp":"2020-07-03T20:25:02Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":}} --> | |||
| }} | |||
| ==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment== | |||
| :This article discusses the ''crime'' named "fraud", which has a specific meaning in common and statute law. If Uri Geller ''has'' committed that crime, then he is literally a fraudster, yes. However, we also often use crimes as metaphors in English -- "The Red Sox ''murdered'' the Yankees," "Douglas Hofstadter ''stole'' the word 'meme' from Richard Dawkins," "The corporate restructuring ''raped, pillaged, and looted'' the IT department." In this sense, if Uri Geller makes his living by fooling people, he is a ''fraud'' even if he has not actually committed the crime called "fraud". | |||
| ] This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2020-01-28">28 January 2020</span> and <span class="mw-formatted-date" title="2020-04-27">27 April 2020</span>. Further details are available ]. Student editor(s): ]. | |||
| {{small|Above undated message substituted from ] by ] (]) 21:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)}} | |||
| :Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary. We don't usually record every metaphoric or dialect use of a word that happens to be the title of an article. In a dictionary, entries are about ''words'' and their usages. In an encyclopedia, articles are about ''things'' that the words just happen to refer to. --] 05:25, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC) | |||
| ==Academic fraud in China== | |||
| The China section generally seems to single out the country for mudslinging rather than describing the laws in place. As for the specific claim of "fraud in academia", that falls in the scope of a separate Misplaced Pages article, "scientific misconduct". ''This'' article's lead is clear that it is about fraud as a legal wrong against a victim. It is about a concept, not a word in all possible uses. ] (]) 19:45, 29 July 2021 (UTC) | |||
| * ] should be a separate article. It is not "fraud" in the sense contemplated by this article, and not all academic fraud has to do with the sciences at all. ] ] 21:59, 29 July 2021 (UTC) | |||
| =Wiki Education assignment: ACCT425 Accounting Capstone=={{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/University_of_Delaware/ACCT425_Accounting_Capstone_(Spring_2022) | assignments = ], ], ] | start_date = 2022-02-08 | end_date = 2022-05-26 }} | |||
| :: Lawyers seem to like capturing words and seizing them for their own use, then referring to everyone else's use of them as technically incorrect and mere metaphor! Case in point: ] actually declared that the word "law" itself, when used to describe laws of nature, was merely an analogy and basically metaphorical, while etymologists believe that the word "law" was actually in existence and usage before lawyers took it over. It's obviously correct to say that Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary. But do look "fraud" up in the dictionary! According to the Oxford English Dictionary fraud has two meanings - the legal sense and the wider sense of intended deception (I am slightly dubious whether the OED has nailed the second definition spot on - three other dictionaries require wrongdoing or unfairness even in the broad sense of the word, but the OED only requires intent to deceive. But please note that all 4 definitions I have checked up in refer to a wider phenomenon of fraud, and two of them don't note the legal meaning at all!). The wider use is ''not'' just a misapplication of the strict legal sense of fraud, it is ''not'' just a metaphor, it actually refers to a '''phenomenon in its own right''' - one that spans art, scientific research, medicine, politics and entertainment. This phenomenon is not so broad that it would be unencylopaedic to cover it. Further, you can't just say "for information on the non-legal sense of fraud, see Hoax", because the phenomonen of fraud actually encompasses things like ballot fraud which hoax doesn't. It will take some work to produce a wider article, but for now I will at least change the wording of the introduction and put in a link to "Hoax" which covers some frauds which are not frauds in the legal sense. --] 23:39, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == "]" listed at ] == | |||
| ] | |||
| The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 15#Consumer fraud}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 08:23, 15 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
| I started the '''"]"''' article now. Please join in creating it. - ] ] | |||
| When editing this I removed the reference to Pater Pio under the criminal fraud section (as a "pious fraud"). Did he really commit ''criminal'' fraud? I believe he was a hoax, but was he acting for personal gain? If not he isn't even a fraud in the civil law sense, or even in the broadest, not specifically legal, sense if you ignore the OED and include a requirement of personal gain for fraud. At any rate (a) his own article doesn't list him as a certified fraud, declaring him to be one here would be both inconsistent and POV (especially as anyone wanting to defend Pater Pio from allegations of fraud might not know to come here and do it - this page links to Pater Pio but not vice versa) and (b) the place to cite him as a fraud would be in the "examples" section further below - but those known examples seem to done-and-dusted, legally-proven cases of fraud, amongst which Pater Pio does not fit. "Pious frauds" as an idea is well worth keeping in the example, and hopefully will be made into a very interesting article, quite probably covering Pater Pio - but that's the place to do it, not a throwaway reference here! --] 00:10, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Primaxwork.com == | |||
| Also, thinking about it, I don't think the statement on the legal definition is correct either - fraud doesn't have to be a tort or crime in its own right, I know that at least in England and Wales, "fraud" may form an element of another crime, such as kidnap. Some work needs to be done... --] 18:02, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I it scam or not ] (]) 13:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Fraudulent hoax == | |||
| We should merge some content from ] and ] to ]. --] 23:29, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ManyFacets 8:49, 8 Dec 2005(EST) | |||
| Legally, fraud has some very specific definitions. Since I am not a lawyer, and do not even play one on the Internet, can a lawyer or law student take a look and add the below constituents of fraud to the wiki definition?: | |||
| The elements of fraud are:<br> | |||
| 1 An affirmative misrepresentation<br> | |||
| 2 Scienter – Intent<br> | |||
| 3 Must be intended to induce reliance.<br> | |||
| 4 There must be reliance.<br> | |||
| 5 Must be damage<br> | |||
| == Fraud & Skimming Cases == | |||
| According to rules and regulations any card available at the merchant outlet or swiped before reported lost/stolen or skimmed, the card holder would be liable to all the transactions. | |||
| why would one go through the whole saga of dispute when he/she is liable for the transaction even when he/she did not participate in it. | |||
| There is no 100% trust on these pieces of plastic? | |||
| What can be done to prevent fraud and skimming cases? | |||
| What happens if the organisation doesn't have the amount of customers to meet the chip & pin standards? | |||
| == Employers fraud? == | |||
| If an employer ''intentionally'' under-pays its workers, presenting the amount of wages paid as the correct amount (e.g. by reducing hours on wage slip or miscalculating) when the correct wages would be higher, is that fraud? Or is that some other crime? I assume it is a crime? ] 16:01, 1 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == VANDALISM == | |||
| The "N..." word appears on the wikipedia page for 'fraud', over and over. I dont know how to remove this. It only shows when you use the small search box and type in "fraud", but not when you search from the homepage. It doesn't appear to be editable. Please remove this. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 04:06, 24 February 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned --> | |||
| == Addition of "g00ns" to Notable Fraudsters == | |||
| I believe the ^subject headline^ should be executed. However, if others believe this would boost their morale, ignore my request. | |||
| == Adding a link == | |||
| I work for the America's Most Wanted Safety Center, a new department of America's Most Wanted getting away from the capturing of criminals, and branching out to all aspects of safety. I feel a link to our post about spotting and reporting email scams would be appropriate and mutually beneficial because it would give fed up patrons of Misplaced Pages the opportunity to see justice served. The link is http://www.amw.com/safety/?p=32 please consider it. | |||
| ] 16:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == See Also == | |||
| A link to ] should be included in the "See Also" section. ] 18:40, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I've added the link, but in the future you can ]. Also, don't forget to sign your posts by typing <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> at the end of your posts. ] 18:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| <br> | |||
| I wanted to be bold, but the article was semi-protected and wouldn't let me change it. Sorry about the sig.... ] 18:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :My bad, I didn't notice it was semi protected. We've had problems with a persistent IP vandal. ] 18:40, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| <br> | |||
| Funny enough, it now lets me edit it, anywho, thanks for doing it anyway! ] 18:41, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Your account is four days old, so it is now "autoconfirmed" - you can now edit semiprotected pages as well as move pages. ] 21:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == First footnote == | |||
| The first footnote in this article appears to be a link to a commercial website. Shouldn't it be removed? | |||
| == trimming the see also section == | |||
| The see also section is getting a bit too long to be very useful, but I'm not sure what should be cut. I did notice, though, that most of the see alsos are specific types of fraud, so perhaps we should create a "types of fraud" category or page and then simply direct people to that. Thoughts? ] 20:34, 20 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == See External links! smallscams.com does not exist == | |||
| Checked on http://whois.domaintools.com/smallscams.com and it says Small Scams does NOT exist. You should remove it! <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 22:14, 17 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| ==Shinichi Fujimura== | |||
| Here is the article about the criminal offense. Although Fujimura's misconduct can be seen as a fraud in the general meaning, there's more suitable article such as ] or ], in which Fujimura was already mentioned. And I think there is a more appropriate example of scientific fraud than Fujimura's one. --] (]) 12:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :I added the more famous examples of scientific frauds than Fujimura. You satisfy this, don't you? And I warn Appletrees not to make a personal attack without any evidence --] (]) 13:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::That's what you're thinking. Fujimura has been more famous and conducted shocking incident in history field for a long time. I warn you about your personal attack and 'bad faith' edit. Besides, the case is so famous that the information has been addressed for over 2 years here. If you want to complain about the information being here, do to Fujimura who committed the crime, or ] who initially added the info, or other editors who agreed with the addition for 2 years. As you wrote the above statement, you declared the "revenge" as contrasting you-know-what cases. I pointed out your bad assumption, and why would be falsely blamed of making such act by you? It is so funny. --] (]) 14:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Well most people don't agree your opinion. Here are the google search results. | |||
| :::747 hits for | |||
| :::114,000 hits for | |||
| :::33,000 hits for | |||
| ::You imply I'm covering up the awkward case for Japanese, because I am a Japanese user. The reason why I removed the Fujimura's link is shown above and it's obviously reasonable. But you reverted my edit so I compromised and added the more suitable names for scientific frauds. AND YOU REVERT MY EDITS AGAIN AND LEAVE ONLY THE FUJIMURA'S CASE. Do you have any comments? I remember you wrote a nasty message in the edit summary box of the other article. If you would continue to criticize me without evidence, I should bring your attitude into official question. --] (]) 14:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Most of people? Who? With what definition and ground? Even if you're right, mentioning 'most people' is meaningless here and unwarranted for your claim. The result by the "Japanese" google engine with "English name" shows a defect to justify your act. I certainly left your addition which is a compromised version, so please try to say "truth". If your edits don't constitute to Misplaced Pages policies, I have a valid reason to "REVERT YOUR EDIT". What is official question? '''Are you threatening me?''' Thus, you are also violating ] and ] Don't forget you already violated ] but I let it because I expected you to behave civil. If you keeping such, you better prepare to be questioned for your conduct. --] (]) 15:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Google results don't change if you would switch your interface language. I showed the google results as a source of my opinion, but what is your ground? You show nothing and just repeat the reverts. I have checked your recent edits and easily noticed your obvious anti-Japanese and Korean nationalistic attitude. All of your edits in the ancient Japan-related articles, such as ] or ] are based on the spread-eagleism with dubious sources. Why you use more reliable source such as academic journals or evaluated books? If you want to bring the discussion to the administrator's board, feel free to do so. --] (]) 16:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::You're speaking a totally irrelevant matter here which doesn't make your edit legitimate. I already said my rationale above, because his fraud is very notable and suits for what fraud defines. You keep making personal attacks and falsely accusing me of removing your edit that is surely a LIE. Then you call me "anti-Japanese sentiement" and "nationalistic Korean"? Your ill faith and personal attacks are not tolerable. I already acknowledge your behavior as removing all mentions about Korean on ancient history of Japan. So your allegation looks groundless and makes you more unreasonable. Your adding 'Hwang Woo-seok is also "revenge" and you violated 3RR. What is your excuse?--] (]) 16:59, 26 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::OK, Go on this absurd argument till the last. I'm certain that you should be removed from the Wikiepdia community. --] (]) 17:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 13:52, 14 November 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fraud article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This  level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Archives (Index) |
|
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
 |
Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
|
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 January 2020 and 27 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kgoncalves10.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Academic fraud in China
The China section generally seems to single out the country for mudslinging rather than describing the laws in place. As for the specific claim of "fraud in academia", that falls in the scope of a separate Misplaced Pages article, "scientific misconduct". This article's lead is clear that it is about fraud as a legal wrong against a victim. It is about a concept, not a word in all possible uses. 73.71.251.64 (talk) 19:45, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
- Academic fraud should be a separate article. It is not "fraud" in the sense contemplated by this article, and not all academic fraud has to do with the sciences at all. BD2412 T 21:59, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
=Wiki Education assignment: ACCT425 Accounting Capstone== This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 February 2022 and 26 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lijiay, Gigan323, Ekerrisk (article contribs).
"Consumer fraud" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Consumer fraud has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 15 § Consumer fraud until a consensus is reached. Hildeoc (talk) 08:23, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
I started the "Consumer fraud" article now. Please join in creating it. - Altenmann >talk
Primaxwork.com
I it scam or not 137.59.145.78 (talk) 13:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Categories:- C-Class level-4 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-4 vital articles in Society and social sciences
- C-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences
- C-Class Crime-related articles
- High-importance Crime-related articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
- C-Class WikiProject Business articles
- High-importance WikiProject Business articles
- C-Class Accounting articles
- Accounting articles
- WikiProject Business articles
- C-Class law articles
- Top-importance law articles
- WikiProject Law articles
- C-Class Skepticism articles
- Mid-importance Skepticism articles
- WikiProject Skepticism articles
- C-Class Philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Philosophy articles
- C-Class ethics articles
- Mid-importance ethics articles
- Ethics task force articles