Talk:False document

message: House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski appears to be a prime candidate for inclusion.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.117.123.148 (talk) 20:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not entirely accurate. Danielewski makes no effort to imply that the book itself is a false document. As an epistolary novel, it is however composed of elements presented as real-world documents that do not really exist outside the book, such as Johnny Truant's diary and the documentary film that Truant is ostensibly writing about. These might be considered false documents, but not the novel itself. Canonblack (talk) 15:06, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  House of Leaves 

message: Is Blair Witch Project an example?
Osias, unregistred
--200.97.51.150 12:15, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blair Witch Project? 

message: I'm not sure about the second or third, but I'm pretty certain the original Endochronic Properties of Thiotimeline was a false document purporting to be a paper on a substance that could travel through time.
--Alazoral 01:31, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This was always intended as a work of fiction, never any kind of a hoax.  Unlike the Sokal paper, it was never published in a reputable academic journal.  The joke depends on the format, borrowed from real academic papers, and probably qualifies the story as a "false document" to the same degree, and in the same way, as Gulliver's Travels.
Astro jpc 17:43, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asimov's Thiotimeline Series? 

message: Paris in the Twentieth Century is claimed to be a real found manuscript by Jules Verne.
Should it be mentioned here somehow?
--Error 00:23, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Paris in the Twentieth Century

message: In my opinion, the definition and examples in this article should only include works that a reader could easily interpret--as per the author's intent--as being true, and that therefore any documents referenced in the work must also exist. Works which are clearly science fiction should not be on the list--no one who reads The Man in the High Castle is going to think that The Grasshopper Lies Heavy is a real book. The same is true of The Foundation series, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and Watchmen.
Maybe I'm wrong on this, though. I'd like to know what others think.
--Mumblingmynah
I reverted the re-adding of Watchmen to the literary examples, based on my above argument, but I would like to discuss this, please. --Mumblingmynah 10:26, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Science fiction?

message: Suggestion, how about discerning among the conceptual status of different fictions?  For example, The Necronomicon and the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy are both fictional and taken to be fiction by any reader of Lovecraft or Douglas Adams, respectively.  Both of these examples appear in fictional stories that take these documents to be true.  But, they are actually references with imaginary antecedents.  I.e.  there was no "Necronomicon" until Lovecraft quoted 'excerpts' from it, nor any "Hitchhiker's Guide" until Adams's characters consulted 'entries' from it.  Their only previous existence was in the minds of their authors.  The excerpts that exist comprise the entire extant Necronomicon and Hitchhiker's Guide, notwithstanding real books with the same titles that might purport to be the same books.  They are not meant to be taken as true in reality, they are only true within their respective fictions.  Of course such examples beg the question of truth, but it is common to regard the truth of a work of fiction to be contextual, that is, consistency with the other suppositions of the fiction.
The truth status of a fictional document that claims to be true but only in another fiction, is undecidable from the perspective of the fiction that it appears in.  Consult the Wiki articles on Godel, and his inconsistency and incompleteness theorems.  Briefly, a countable set of consistent axioms can't prove or refute a contradiction among themselves, or prove their own consistency.  How this applies to 'false documents' is that although you and I know (or at least their creators knew) that such books as the Necronomicon and the Hitchhiker's Guide are not true in our world, the characters who read them in the stories that they appear in do not know that.  Although a quote from these books could in theory be correctible in the story, the stories themselves assume the books to be true, so proving them false would prove the fiction false and hence prove the book within the book true!  
Both of these examples are fiction, but true in their context.  Other possibilities exist that might be termed 'false documents.'  Fiction that is supposed to be fiction  within the fiction that it appears in.  Nonfiction that appears in fiction and is supposed to be nonfiction in the fiction.  Nonfiction that is supposed to be fiction in the fiction. Any of the above might be satirical, or partially satirical and partially serious.  Then there is parody, which might be composed of fiction and nonfiction, neither of which is to be taken seriously.  Of course it all depends on context.
This encyclopedia entry could be divided into sections with examples of each kind of 'false document.' The term 'False document' may not apply to some examples and could be changed, or some of the examples could be included in another entry.  Other possibilities exist.  Opinions?
oneismany 11:13, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Fiction in Fiction and other alternative conceptions

message: Protocols of the Elders of Zion Jaysbro 23:58, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hoax/Forgery example 

message: Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events Jaysbro 23:58, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern literary example 

message: The article lists Journal of Irreproducible Results as a hoax.  Is it really a hoax, the purpose is not to deceive? --Bubba73 (talk), 03:35, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Journal of Irreproducible Results 

message: Wow, it says here the DaVinci Code is undoubtedly based on false documents! Then what is all the controversy about, when you can just say it's all forged right here! (It even says Dan Brown helped making the documents up! Who knew!)
OF COURSE it's not certain if the many documents the novel talks about are fake or not, so as long as nobody is sure about that, then there is no reason for it to be here! Kreachure 17:43, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What's not certain? The whole thing about the Priory of Sion has been proven to be a hoax. The people who perpetrated the hoax admitted to this in open court. I'm re-adding The Da Vinci Code back to the list, based on this. -- 12.116.162.162 16:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mystery solved with POV! 

message: Would not Michael Crichton's Airframe qualify? The page for the book specifically links and mentions false documents, but this page does not include the book. --Cipherswarm 16:05, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the matter here is trying to be useful, but not exhaustive.  We could add every instance of a false document, but it would be a bit much. —Cliffb 19:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Fiction: Crichton's Airframe? 

message: I'm not sure what the Indian Politics section conveys, let alone if it should be in this article.  I'm tagging the paragraph with  and unless discussion to the contrary I'll delete it in five days.  —Cliffb 19:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Indian Politics

message: I would not count Texas Chainsaw as a false document, since the narration only claims that it was "an account"-an account of something only means a narrative or scenario of events, not necessarily that the events are true. However, The Last House on the Left's introduction claimed the events depicted were true, so that is a blatant false document. 
Enda80 22:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Texas Chainsaw, Last House on the Left

message: The device is so common that any attempt to list the works that use it can only be woefully incomplete and inadequate to the task; it would seem to be one of the very oldest and most widespread literary devices ever created. The list as it is now, in spite of the fact that it contains only a minute fraction of all possible works that could be included, takes up rather a large part of the entire article. I would think that the best thing to do would be to simply delete the entire list and replace it with a statement that is a common device, and perhaps put in one or two of the earliest examples; that would suffice, I think. Hi There 09:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The List In The "False Documents In Fiction" Section - Is It Necessary Or Useful, Really?

message: To be honest I found the article slightly confusing so I can't tell for sure, but shouldn't Ossian be one of the most important examples? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.107.33.77 (talk) 22:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ossian 

message: Are there other terms used in literary criticism for "false documents?"
--jenlight 23:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: that is the specific case where the documents are letters from A to B. The classic format is an alternation of a letter from A to B, then one from B to A, and so on. 2A01:CB0C:761:5B00:29D6:4241:36C0:5150 (talk) 07:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative Terms 

message: should operation mincemeat be included?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.99.90 (talk) 10:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WW2 

message: I'm enjoying this article, trying to relate it to things I know.  Maybe 63% understanding it, which is not bad for me reading an article of this degree of abstraction.
But the section "False Documents in Theory" stumps me.  What does that mean?  (I confess to not having read any of the three examples given.)  But where are you going with this section?  Please can the text give some indication?
-------------------------------
The story "The Naval Treaty", included in "Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes", includes a letter to Dr. Watson from his old schoolfellow, Percy Phelps.
To clarify your concept of "false document", does this make the letter a false document, or does it make the story a false document?  I'm guessing the former, but I don't think the article makes this clear.
-----------------------------
In the Holmes story "The Five Orange Pips" there is a "quotation" from the American Encyclopedia, read aloud by Holmes.  In "The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle" (both are in the book "Adventures of Sherlock Holmes"), Holmes reads a newspaper clipping about a jewel robbery.  I expect these are both false documents.  If this is so, then many if not most of the Holmes stories contain false documents.
A fascinating idea.  Thanks.  Wanderer57 (talk) 00:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  False Documents in Theory 

message: This article is interesting but very frustrating.
* So many diverse things have been brought in as examples of false documents that the concept now seems to me generalized almost to the point of being meaningless and useless.
* The last time a comment or question asked in the talk page was given a response was August 2006.
Does anyone (except me) have this article on their watchlist? Some feedback would be appreciated.
Thanks, Wanderer57 (talk) 19:05, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frustrating Article 

message: *I just want it noted here that my CD Merriam-Webster dictionary has no entry for "false document"? Accordingly, how would one defend a charge this we have by this article a neologism? --Ludvikus (talk) 23:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dictionary meaning(s) 

message: The initial scope of this article was a "false document" as a literary device. Has the article become a catchall and lost its focus and value?  
Wanderer57 (talk) 16:55, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC: Scope of FALSE DOCUMENT article 

message: Well, more specifically Rama 2. There is a small ammount of documentation in it, regarding the intelligence, social skills, and likelihood to get along with each other based on tests (it's been about a year or two since I read it last, you'll have to forgive my poor memory) but that there are fictional tests means that the documents from them would be false documents.. - NemFX (talk) 04:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rama

message: Hi.
I saw this:
"I noticed this:
"The moral and legal implications of false document art are, by necessity, complex and perhaps insoluble. The difference between a great artistic achievement and a stunning forgery is slim."
But it's art, so if it's explicitly marked as such (art), then why is there a problem? Also, have the courts ever ruled on this (dobutful since the issues are possibly "insoluble", meaning no court on Earth would be able to untangle them.)? mike4ty4 (talk) 01:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  But it's Art... 

message: What is the difference between a "false document" and a "forged document"? 
Also, I cannot believe that "One of the earliest examples of the technique is the 16th century chivalric romance Amadis of Gaul (1508, Garci Rodríguez de Montalvo)."     There must have been false documents around in biblical times.
--Austrian (talk) 23:38, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  False document, or forgery?  

message: It's a small point, and quite peripheral, but worth pointing out.
Since it is difficult to imagine a typesetter working without a manuscript, we must assume that one existed.
The contemporaries and enemies of Restif de la Bretonne have both attested to the author actually composing directly onto the page form of a printing press with moveable type. Despite writing in the 18th Century, this must make him the first author to write using the idea if not the actual artefact of a typewriter - or indeed, a wordprocessor.
Nuttyskin (talk) 17:43, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Re: Protocols of the Elders of Zion

message: Would the "insertions" in the files at The National Archives (as mentioned on that WP page), and the Report from Iron Mountain be false documents? Jackiespeel (talk) 19:29, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: More documents

message: What about the Tanaka memorial of the late 1930s?--68.175.35.188 (talk) 03:34, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tanaka memorial 

message: I am reading the article for the first time and for me it´s not possible to understand the meaning of "false document" from the text as it is.
The first paragraph is not clear and does not resolve if it is a technique from literature, or an intended fraud. The spirit of the paragraph though makes to think that it aims to cheat on the receiver of the document. But the examples named below are in complete contradiction with that (nobody is expected to believe in Tlon, or Uqbar from Borges text, but it is shown as an example though).
English is not my first language so i am not sure wich meaning is correct.
I originally searched for the article with the intention of knowing it  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Titopte (talk • contribs) 00:19, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very confusing article 

message: I suggest breaking the large list in this article into at least five and perhaps more separate lists. Distinguishing at least the following:
# Works where the "false document" element is merely marketing, e.g. "Fargo" falsely claimed to be a true story.
# Works which claim internally to be something they are not (e.g. Goldman's "The Princess Bride" has footnotes and interjections which keep up the pretence that it is an abridgement of an existing story by a fictional person)
# Fictional works that merely refer to other works that do not exist (this is arguably no different from referring to people or places that don't exist)
# Apparently factual works that were discovered to be in part or in whole fiction (fake diaries, that sort of thing)
# Fragmentary works created as part of a larger fiction, where the "entire" work never existed. e.g. the "Black Freighter" comics in Watchmen, or the introductions to non-existent books in Stanisław Lem's "Imaginary Magnitude")
82.69.171.91 (talk) 13:17, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: We have to distinguish false documents (which are made with the intent to deceive) from fictional documents (which are cited in order to create verisimilitude). DS (talk) 15:24, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sub-sections 

message: Should the article False documentation become a subsection of this page - or is there a fundamental difference between the two? Alternatively, is there 'a natural divide' so material can be partitioned between the two pages? Jackiespeel (talk) 10:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: False documents and false documentation

message: The graduate-level seminar 'happened recently' - dates anyone? Jackiespeel (talk) 22:36, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seminar 

message: In the entry for Edgar Rice Burroughs, is it worth mentioning that imitators such as Lin Carter (Jandar of Callisto) use the same framing device? —Tamfang (talk) 23:19, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  the Barsoom tradition 

message: It looks like some people have mentioned this before, but it seems like this article should be split into 2, and a disambiguation page made for the term "false document"?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by CeraWithaC (talk • contribs) 20:49, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation? 

message: I just removed a chunk of text from the article. A template had been in place since August 2017 regarding the insertion of information that appeared to be an attempt to turn the article into an invalid kind of db page. The inserted material in the lede gave a separate meaning for "false document", and an opening section apparently added at the same time confused "false document" with "falsified or forged contracts and credentials". None of the material I removed was supported by sources. Before attempting to re-add this information, please consider that this article is about false documents as defined in the lede, and not about real-world business swindles and fake credentials. There is other material still in the article that should probably also be removed. 
From other comments on this page, it seems that this article is becoming subject to the same kinds of misunderstanding as the article Unseen character. 
There is a specific definition for a false document: it is a literary device, as stated in the lede, and has nothing to do with real-world forgeries, swindles, and propaganda. Someone suggested merging this with False documentation; while there is right now some overlap between the two, there should be none. A false document is a literary device used to make the fiction seem more "real"; it does not include works of propaganda created to drive an audience to action by misleading or misinforming them, it does not include falsified information intended to commit a real-world crime. 
A legitimate example of a false document is Lovecraft's Necronomicon, which he encouraged his colleagues to mention in their works, giving the fictional book "a life of its own" and thus lending verisimilitude to any work of fiction that also mentioned it. 
A real-world book is only a false document if it is presented as something it is not; William Goldman's The Princess Bride was purported by the author to be a translation of a lost manuscript when it was in fact an original creation by Goldman. Jay Anson's The Amityville Horror is a novel, but it was marketed initially as an account of a true story, incorporating the names of real people for some of the characters to make it seem to have a basis in reality (the fact that some of these real people were actually attempting fraud to escape a mortgage or engaging in embellishment to further their real-world careers does not make the book a false document; the claim that it is a journalistic account does). 
Despite what someone commented earlier, an epistolary novel is not the same thing as a false document, but it may create false documents within the text to lend an aura of authenticity to the events of the plot; examples of this would be Dracula and House of Leaves, neither of which is a false document itself. 
Adding to the confusion is the natural-language use of the phrase to refer to binding legal documents signed by parties that are intentionally misrepresenting their identities, goals or details of a legal matter. This is more properly termed an invalid document (once the fraud has been discovered), as opposed to a forgery, which is a document appearing to be legal or accurate which is intentionally otherwise. Either of these uses might more appropriately be termed a "falsified document" or false documentation. Canonblack (talk) 15:52, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of db/hijack material