Information icon.svg Please vote in the 2017 board of trustees election. The cabal thanks you for your service.

RationalWiki:Articles for deletion

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
For the German political party known as AfD, see Alternative für Deutschland.

Some articles on RationalWiki are ripe for assassination deletion. If you think an article fits this description (and there is no page that it could be better merged with), here are the steps to take to put it on this page:

  1. Add {{Article for deletion}} or {{Article for deletion|Reason}} to the top of the page you think needs deletion.
  2. Press the save button to get the rest of the instructions to populate.
  3. The second line of instructions that appear below the deletion template allow for pre-populating a discussion, click that button, replace the word "Reason" with your reasoning for wanting to delete the article.
  4. Finally add {{RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/ReplaceMeWithTheArticleName}} to top of this list. Don't forget to change the ReplaceMeWithTheArticleName to the proper article name from step 3.

Please notify the creator/main editor(s), particularly if it's new.

Then wait a while and see what the mob thinks, unless there's an actual reason it needs to be taken out and shot quickly (e.g., severely problematic living person bio).

And don't forget to subscribe. This will allow you to see when a new article for deletion is added.

To archive:

  1. Edit the AFD page to change the result from "?" to "deleted" or "kept" or whatever.
  2. Go to RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Log and remove the {{PageToBeArchived}}.
  3. Go to the 2017 archives and add {{PageToBeArchived}} in the right spot.

Doctrine and Covenants | Result: ?[edit]

Doctrine and Covenants (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. So this is obviously meant to be like Biblical foreknowledge, except that it's Mormon scriptures foreknowledge. And everybody knows that the Mormon scriptures weren't written thousands of years ago, they were written in the 19th century. So this page is pointing out that there's a passage of Mormon scripture that predicted the American Civil War some 29 years before it started. I can't see that that's very impressive. Surely loads of people back then thought that it was only a matter of time before the North went to war with the South. But this page, in its current form, seems to suggest that was some kind of marvelously miraculous prediction. Spud (talk) 10:24, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. some trivial work could make the page usable -- give it a day FuzzyCatPotato of the NSFW Sock tuckers (talk/stalk) 12:59, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

  1. Someone needs to expand it to make it worth keeping, but the person who created the page seemed uninterested. Expand or delete. Bongolian (talk) 21:18, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff | Result: ?[edit]

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Obsolete person, also stub. 💎📀1️⃣ (talk) 04:28, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
  2. Let's take this seriously and try to get this discussion back on track. She was someone who made headlines in Austria seven years ago. She's not important now. Spud (talk) 11:19, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. A person is a person no matter how obsolete. Spectral Thief Marshadow (talk) 22:14, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
  2. Missional, no reason to delete - David Gerard (talk) 00:55, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
  3. I hope they feel better soon. -Xbony2 (talk) 23:28, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

1984-85 miners' strike | Result: ?[edit]

1984-85 miners' strike (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Unclear missionality. This sorta stuff would do better in a "History of UK/Britain/etc" article -- or really, not anywhere at all. Mʀ. Wʜɪsᴋᴇʀs, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 23:00, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
    It has info on union history, and isn't union coverage missional? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 23:05, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
    Maybe -- but it'd go better in that article than on its own. Unions relate to anti-authoritarianism, but we're not-an-encyclopedia of all things union. Herr FuzzyKatzenPotato (talk/stalk) 11:12, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
  2. As a separate article, the way it looks now? Fugeddaboudit! However, I'm sure some of its overly-specific-yet-overall-incomplete narrative could be ported to somewhere? Like some article(s) on Thatcher/UK energy policy/global warming/unions/neoclassical economics/etc... But we're not keeping it as a standalone article, methinks. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 13:05, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. Fine by me - David Gerard (talk) 09:28, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
  2. Seems to me to be an even bigger deal in UK history than the breaking of the air traffic controllers' union in the USA, which was a turning point in US history. - Smerdis of Tlön, LOAD "*", 8, 1. 03:15, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

  1. I'm not British so there might be something that makes it justified as its own article but as it stands we should add it to an article on striking or labor movements or even make a history of the British labor movement as a page but as it stands there are many other similar events across many countries and I don't think that they all deserve their own pages. — Unsigned, by: Vorarchivist / talk / contribs

Goat[edit]