RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Archive 2024

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is a list of old deletion discussions. Newest at the top.

April 2024[edit]

Fun:Barry Bonds | Result: Quick delete[edit]

Fun:Barry Bonds (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. What is the point of this 50.29.218.72 (talk) 21:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
  2. good question BON — Unsigned, by: Scream!! / talk / contribs 22:10, 19 April 2024‎
  3. Hopelessly tiny stub forgotten since 2007. Can be quickly deleted. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 09:25, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Shelly the Republican | Result: Deleted[edit]

Shelly the Republican (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Another decade old article about a random-ass blog no one gives a shit about. Carthage (talk) 22:33, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
  2. Seven of the nine references in this farticle point to her blog, which has been taken over by a spam site! —cosmikdebris talk stalk 22:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
  3. Completely outdated with broken/dead links and a subject nobody cares about anymore. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 00:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
  4. Most of it's links are dead and the main website directs to a Jewish gambling site now (it's written in Hebrew). Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
  5. The incinerations will continue until morale improves. A somebody. (talk) 19:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
  6. Suspect nothing shall be lost if this page suddently vanished. KarmaPolice (talk) 20:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

  1. If nothing else, this is worth a chuckle about the stupidity of the Religious Right, though even I have to agree that this may not be worth having its own page anymore. Fold it into a list of old moronic blogs or something. Luigifan18 (talk) 01:11, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
    Unless it can be shown that said blog had a bit of 'weight' at it's peak, I am not really sure whether it's worth holding onto. And doing a surface skim it doesn't really even tickle me re green ink, batshitiness or simple plain stupidity. KarmaPolice (talk) 20:54, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

Freeganism | Result: Incinerated with the rest of the trash[edit]

Freeganism (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. As Carthage once said Said "It's shit. A stub, no citations, of dubious missionality. Why is an ethical stance on food waste and consumerism suddenly woo? There's no denialism being promoted. No misinformation being spread. This reads more like a shitty rant than a genuinely informative piece".Reichtangle (talk) 12:01, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
  2. Delete , boring EditorialMaster (talk) 12:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
  3. Carthage (talk) 16:26, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
  4. Weird article. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 12:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
  5. The subject isn't worthy of an article. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 15:13, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
  6. Using my brand new Article Incinerator:tm: we can get rid of this article and never think about it ever again. A somebody. (talk) 19:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
    You mean like this?
    Kill it with Scorpio.gif
    cosmikdebris talk stalk 20:02, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

High Speed 2 | Result: Keep[edit]

High Speed 2 (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. This only barely furthers our mission, and does not explain why the ideas discussed are actually missional. Justarandomliberal (talk) 13:29, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. I think this article actually heavily responds to criticism of this sustainable planning-related article, as well as being a good resource for learning about the political subject. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 18:00, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. Americentrism in action - 'ooh, I am not aware of how big this subject has been in the UK for almost 20 years, so nuke the thing!' Okay, it is not a terribly good article (puts on my ToDo list) but it's hardly a) a stub or b) actually incorrect. If RW wants to get it's non-American user-base larger, having articles like this is vital. This is not just a 'keep', but an impassioned plea for it to remain. KarmaPolice (talk) 11:16, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
  3. A common them of political clout in the UK, and part of some conspiracies in the UK. Lavalizard101 (talk) 11:34, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
  4. Keep Revolverman (talk) 21:30, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
  5. Carthage (talk) 17:39, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
  6. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 02:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
  7. Bongolian (talk) 07:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

  1. Move to the essay space. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 14:24, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. Sure. Justarandomliberal (talk) 14:28, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  3. It's tangentially missional in the sense that it talks about politicians making bad decisions, but missional enough for mainspace? I dunno about that. Luigifan18 (talk) 14:38, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  4. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 15:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  5. If delete fails I would be OK with essay too.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 17:48, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  6. We should somehow merge all the train related articles into Rail transportation and make it missional. Some of the details in these articles are rather pointless. - Rairyu75 (Talk) 23:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
    However, merging all of it into one will produce a hell of a doorstopper of an article - I hold we should not be scared of divisions when warranted. Plus, it totally ignores the fact this is a *particular* political argument in the UK and has been for ages (which won't sit well in a generic 'rail' page.) KarmaPolice (talk) 21:25, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
    I cannot think of any subject under the sun to which one could not think of some "political" angle. Furthermore, politics, as such, is not on our mission statements. It's simply inferred.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 11:49, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
    You don't need to 'think of some political angle' for HS2, for it hits you in the face like a large trout. HS2 - if done right - would come under parts 1,2 & 4 of RW's main mission. And these days, anything 'political' almost instantly gets waylaid by cranks, liars, shills and astroturfs which means it comes under our banner. Lastly, sometimes RW does need some 'explanatory' articles to give our 'core articles' better context/intelligibility; because sometimes they do not exist elsewhere [my main argument for doing the various UK GE articles, which strictly speaking are not 'missional']. In this particular case, the WP version is unsuitable for this task, so we should have one - as long as it is both concise and accurate. KarmaPolice (talk) 17:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
    So can you give me an example of anything to which one could use the description "political" in some way? (Which, I think we both agree, is not listed as one of our prime mission objectives anyway.)Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
    I'm not sure what the hell you're asking here. Perhaps a majority of mainspace RW articles could be defined as 'political' in some form. But my argument in 'retain' isn't that it's political alone, but it's both political and missional. KarmaPolice (talk) 19:30, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
    If you don't understand the point then so be it. In any event it looks like the issue is moot so I'll leave this dead horse in peace.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:40, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

VenomFangX | Result: No consensus after nearly 2 months[edit]

VenomFangX (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Doesn't meet the 100,000 subscriber requirement, but also seems utterly irrelevant. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 15:06, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
    What are their video views? Has anybody notable responded to them? Carthage (talk) 15:16, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
    I think they've deleted most of their videos. Their currently most-viewed one has 6,000 views. Some response videos have over 100,000 views. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 15:21, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
    If the response videos have over a hundred thousand views, then I would say that they're not a nobody. Maybe not really relevant anymore, but people know who they are. Carthage (talk) 15:24, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. Batshit Creationists were a dime a dozen back in the ye olden days of youtube and shouldn't have an article on every single one of them, especially when most of them are nobodies. A somebody. (talk) 20:03, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
  3. No remaining videos less than 11 years old, has 830 subscribers and no original ideas; I see no reason why this channel needs more than a mention in the Thunderf00t article, since a spat with him seems to be the main claim to fame here. There are no ideas that are unique to this person, so there is no particular reason why their particular views need to be documented or responded to in an article addressed directly to them, especially given that they appear to have had no presence of any kind since ~2015. Notably, contrary to what was stated above, their most viewed video has 60,000 views, and is their response to Thunderf00t, reinforcing that they are most notable for petty internet drama. Altogether, this article has nothing substantial to contribute to the site's mission, because its subject has nothing substantial to contribute even to fundamentalism. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 talk 01:33, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
  4. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:57, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
  5. Delete , old videos , few subscribers , does not add anything to Ratwikis sites and missions.Oneandtwo (talk) 18:32, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
  6. Dead channel, wasn’t interesting in the first place. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 20:12, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
  7. Seems utterly irrelevant nowadays. The fact the opener admits the page had to be trimmed down because it was insanely long already tells an entire story. -- Techpriest (talk) 22:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
  8. I think this is undue attention for someone with 44,911 total views. Justarandomliberal (talk) 23:54, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. Raw subscriber count isn't the only measure of a YouTuber's relevance. VenomFangX has made himself enough of a nuisance to the reality-based community to force them to engage with him, if only to shoot him down (see also Shockofgod). Keep the article; people need to know who this twerp is and why his opinions are worthless. Luigifan18 (talk) 17:07, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. Seconded. Carthage (talk) 17:15, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
  3. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 00:35, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
  4. Seems more of a history/archive piece, and one of the original YEC's on YouTube. Part of a small and fascinating era. Patty Pat 12:57, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
  5. There is no real cost in retaining it. Suggest perhaps somebody gives it a tidyup / summarisation before left as an archive piece. I know it is not part of RWs mission but I suspect we might be the only documented article on them left now, and I feel it's important it is documented. KarmaPolice (talk) 19:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
  6. Is of historical significance, at least. Plutocow (talk) 19:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  7. Ioe bidome (talk) 23:46, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
  8. Keep Revolverman (talk) 20:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

  1. Okay, who re-opened this one? This was voted on back in February! Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 23:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Presidential candidacy of Donald Trump | Result: Merged[edit]

Presidential candidacy of Donald Trump (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Most of this article clearly hasn't been updated since mid-2016 and it has little information on the 2020 and 2024 elections, which are mostly covered in the main Donald Trump page. Maybe this requires a major cleanup and rewrite or a merge into the main Donald Trump page, but this article clearly can't continue to exist in the state it is in now. Plutocow (talk) 21:30, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. Agree with 'merge', but I am formally voting 'Keep' because the merge must be done before this article is thrown in the memory hole. KarmaPolice (talk) 16:43, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. We have other articles that are dated, but we still keep them (DAESH comes to mind here.) This article needs work, not just to be thrown out into the bin. Merge it or whatever, but this article is definitely missional. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Carthage (talk) 16:59, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

  1. Merge with the appropriate section(s) in Donald Trump. --Goatspeed. See what I'm up toCircularREmail2.gifasoningSee my experiments 23:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. Merge. Bongolian (talk) 05:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. Merge thrice. Patty Pat 13:57, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. Agree with KP's suggestion to keep the page long enough to properly merge, but since I do think it should be merged with Donald Trump, I'm voting here. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 02:56, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
  5. As per KP. Bongolian (talk) 03:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
  6. Merge into main article on the big orange baby. Spud (talk) 14:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
  7. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 23:52, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
  8. Merge RTD (talk) 03:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
  9. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 17:48, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
  10. Justarandomliberal (talk) 16:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

  • This has been open for a couple of months now does someone want to close this? Lavalizard101 (talk) 16:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Daniel Kawczynski | Result: Impeached[edit]

Daniel Kawczynski (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. It's just an interview of an obscure politician. It hasn't been edited for many years and I doubt someone will improve it anytime soon. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 17:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 17:14, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
  3. As it stands, it's almost all quotes, so not worth keeping. If anyone wants to commit to expanding the page, I'd reconsider. Bongolian (talk) 17:47, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
  4. Pointless. Plutocow (talk) 19:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
  5. The current presentation isn't very useful and looks like an old news blurb. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 22:16, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
  6. Agreed. Also agree with GeeJay's point that if this page was rebuilt at some later point, there's no 'bones' in this one which would be useful. KarmaPolice (talk) 19:33, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
  7. - Rairyu75 (Talk) 19:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
  8. Weirdly constructed. Bongolian (talk) 21:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
  9. TNT. Justarandomliberal (talk) 21:52, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

  1. Judging from his Wikipedia pageWikipedia, there are some things that we perhaps could cover about him, so, if someone wants to prove me wrong and edit the article, I'll change my vote. At this point, TNT the whole thing would probably be better than the current status of the article. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 17:15, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

High-speed rail | Result: Keep[edit]

High-speed rail (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. This contains no explanation or refutation of crank ideas, pseudoscience, anti-science, authoritarianism, or fundamentalism and does not analyze or criticize how these subjects are handled in the media. Justarandomliberal (talk) 13:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:21, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. I'll maybe be contrarian here and say I like having articles about politics or science or whatever that are informational. I don't think Renewable energy, Disease, Refugee, Child abuse, Secession, Cannabis, or Rape contain too much of what you mentioned either, but I think they're very useful for their informational value—they serve as an easy way to find information about these subjects, and I like that. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 14:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. Carthage (talk) 14:22, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  3. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 15:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  4. Needs expansion, but there's always this sort of moral panic about how building railways is somehow reducing freedom and leads to communism (at least in America), so it's a missional topic at least. Plutocow (talk) 20:55, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  5. Bongolian (talk) 06:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
  6. Officially keep, but informally say it needs merging into a general 'rail' page which I think needs an overhaul itself. KarmaPolice (talk) 11:08, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
  7. The missionality may not be immediately obvious but the subject of public transport ties into very missional topics like climate change, poverty, legacy of racial discrimination, for a few off the top of my head. The page itself, from a glance, presents some basic information. Even if it doesn't explicitly respond to anti-science content it may challenge it by presenting pro-science content. I would maybe consider how to bring it to a state that is more obviously missional, looking at who opposes high-speed rail and why a bit more. Chillpilled (talk) 11:10, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
  8. A common theme of political clout and part of some conspiracies. Lavalizard101 (talk) 11:35, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
  9. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 15:40, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
  10. Keep Revolverman (talk) 21:00, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

  1. Send it to the essay space. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 14:23, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. I am also fine with sending it to the essay space. Same with High Speed 2. Justarandomliberal (talk) 14:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  3. Ditto. It's a good article, but I can't see what it has to do with the mission. (I'd dare to say that my Progress & Regress Pokémon project is more missional than this.) Luigifan18 (talk) 14:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  4. If delete fails I would be OK with essay too.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 17:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
  5. Into rail transportation! - Rairyu75 (Talk) 23:33, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

March 2024[edit]

Gaysdidit | Result: Merged[edit]

Gaysdidit (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Someone mentioned merging this with Didit fallacy, but really, what is there to merge? It's just a definition and a list, while even the sections in that article are more substantive. It'd be far easier to just get rid of it, and nothing of value will be lost. Plutocow (talk) 21:45, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. Not a real article 63.115.31.130 (talk) 19:58, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

  1. It's a list with cited examples, so if someone could rework it into an admittedly small section that'd be fine with me. Carthage (talk) 22:48, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. Merge it. Patty Pat 12:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
  3. Third. KarmaPolice (talk) 18:44, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
  4. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
  5. As the person who originally suggested merging Ioe bidome (talk) 20:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
  6. Yeah, this doesn't need to be its own page. Merge it. Luigifan18 (talk) 00:09, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
  7. Merge. Bongolian (talk) 01:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
  8. Merge - best merged do not think it should be it's own page Oneandtwo (talk) 18:30, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
  9. Merge - Merge this EditorialMaster (talk) 04:43, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  10. Merge. Justarandomliberal (talk) 11:06, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

Andreas Ludwig Kalcker | Result: Shoved back into the rough draft bin[edit]

Andreas Ludwig Kalcker (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. This guy seems like a nobody, and this page is kinda shit. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 10:44, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
    How do you define "nobody"? Carthage (talk) 11:35, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
    You know what? After a second look, I was able to find more information on the guy than what I first found. So maybe a complete rehaul of the article would be a better solution than deleting in this case. I'm not sure if anyone really would want to in this guy's case, but we can see how the others feel about this article I guess. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 11:48, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
    Then I know what my vote is gonna be. Carthage (talk) 11:56, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

  1. Redirect to draft based off Natsuki's response. Carthage (talk) 11:56, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. Sure, I take this one back. Draft it. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 23:28, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
  3. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 00:36, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
  4. Redirect , i will try to add some value to this article once draft complete.Teriyaki12 (talk) 03:25, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

  • Definitely a pretty clear draftify (unanimous decision by the mob). Can a sysop close this and move the page? Justarandomliberal (talk) 00:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Sydney Sweeney | Result: Deleted[edit]

Sydney Sweeney (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Only missional for people's reaction to her boobs, which will soon be forgotten. Bongolian (talk) 20:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. Remembering a person in this context is pretty awful, honestly. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 20:34, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
  3. No, Bob, No. We can't stoop this low. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 20:44, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
  4. Nothing against the author, but if I want big boobs, I know where to find them. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 20:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
  5. Will likely become irrelevant within weeks. Plutocow (talk) 20:51, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

BadEmpanada | Result: Eliminado[edit]

BadEmpanada (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. The page as it currently exists is an unwarranted puff piece for a controversial ML pundit. He's made some good videos, but he is far more known for pointless drama. I advocate to move this either to draft or for a hasty delete. Carthage (talk) 04:19, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. In order to make a decent page on BadEmpanada, you'd have to 1. watch a ton of their videos on both their main and second channel, 2. watch a bunch of videos on a bunch of other channels to make sure his claims are up to snuff, 3. document his debauchery on a bunch of banned social media accounts that may or may not be archived, 4. do a lot of research into subjects like Latin American hitory, leftism, and politics to analyze his claims. BadEmpanada isn't worth this much effort to create a decent article, and the article is terrible in its current state. Plutocow (talk) 04:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  3. I was planning on going through this over the weekend and completely removing the puff parts of this piece, and going over all of the many, many negatives about him, but honestly, the page isn't even that necessary in my opinion. I'm okay with it just being deleted before that happens. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 06:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kaaYvauNho This video caused a bunch of edit wars on wikipedia, which was interesting to investigate, but ultimately I side with the wikipedia editors on him not knowing what he is talking about. Otherwise I hear he has called for terrorism and murder, etc, unless we are going to give a more clear picture of who he is, the article should probably not exist. BumblingBuffoon (talk) 07:19, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  5. We are not here just to big up YouTubers you happen to like. And linking to their Patreon and Ko-Fi pages amounts to spam. Spud (talk) 14:04, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  6. I'm not really seeing any benefit to RationalWiki or our mission by having this article here. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 18:40, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. I fail to see why incomplete information warrants a deletion, as there exist plenty of other articles that are similarly structured and are allowed to be kept, such as Shaun. Plus, there are links of videos from his main channel listed in the article. There are also plenty of articles critiquing BsdEmpanada's videos, such as these ones. He even got a response from Kurzgesagt to his rebuttal on climate change. DaRealPrinceZuko (talk) 05:17, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
    Your "articles" are some nobody's blog and a YouTube video with less than a thousand views. Plutocow (talk) 05:36, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
    What about his debates with Vaush, Destiny, Kurzgesagt, Matt Binder, Knowing Better, and Johnny Harris? Plus, in my opinion, if BadEmpanada should be deleted, so should people like Shaun. His overall channel even has more than 9 million views. DaRealPrinceZuko (talk) 05:44, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
    A few response videos don't address the problems with this article. "Other stuff exists" is not a valid excuse either, especially as Bad Empanada is much more controversial than Shaun to say the least and their articles shouldn't be handled the same. Plutocow (talk) 06:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Honestly, it's not even that there's incomplete information, it's that you wrote a puff piece. You decided to just link sixteen of your favourite videos of his, you included, not one, but two of his crowdfunding pages—both his Patreon and his Ko-fi—and nothing about his controversies, such as his genocide denial or sending of death threats to every single person he dislikes. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 06:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
I already linked a video of his that details a dispute he had with one of his political rivals over accusations of antisemitism against him in the career section. Also, if the genocide denial you're referring to is his Holodomor video, he's not denying that it happened, but just analyzing the Wikipedia article's sources. Additionally, most the the death threats I recall (i.e. "Stalin, Beria, Gulag!") are mostly jokes, rather than genuine threats and the screenshot of him supposedly threatening to have Eristocracy targeted by a Palestinian militant group is fake and references a video game. The list of videos on the article is not really selective either, as all of them come from his main channel, so this is not an issue of me "just linking my favorite videos." Instead of just assuming that this is a case of me "just creating articles of people I like," can you please ask me why I did it next time? DaRealPrinceZuko (talk) 17:33, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Treating Wikipedia like the pinnacle of history scholarship on atrocities, i.e. specifically choosing to respond to the popular representation as collected by possible-laypeople, seems like the sort of thing genocide deniers would do, tbh (though I don't know what all he said or anything). Don't get me wrong Wikipedia articles can be surprisingly decent, but if you were say taking the issue to court (as happened with e.g. the Holocaust in some instances), you would not search for an expert to give testimony by recruiting among Wikipedia editors. But as regards BadEmpanada in particular I could give you no well informed opinion other than he is not too shabby on finding decent sources sometimes (I did cite him to refute a claim Vaush made, and that's just one instance). Overall I have to abstain on the AfD I think. Chillpilled (talk) 18:34, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
We could just add his debates with other streamers like Vaush and Kurzgesagt and add a list of controversies, like his Holodomor analysis and the accusations of antisemitism against him in regards to Israel. Plus, the benefits for having BadEmpanada here consist of refuting common Zionist propaganda, colonial apologism, detailing his controversies and debates with other streamers, dismantling clout arguments defending people like Vaush and Beau of the Fifth Column, and critiquing neoliberalism and American exceptionalism. DaRealPrinceZuko (talk) 19:33, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── If the article's missing so much content, it should be in the draft space. That's what draft is for. I wouldn't be against moving it over there, but will still keep my delete vote for the present thing in mainspace. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 20:29, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Given that this user doesn't seem to know what a "reliable source" is and thinks response videos qualify as "debate", I don't have much hope in their ability to improve the article. Plutocow (talk) 20:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Yeah… doesn't a debate have to… you know… go back and forth? If two people make several response videos in reaction to each other on a single subject, then it could loosely be called a debate — and I'd still hesitate to describe it as such, given the lack of actual interaction as compared to a face-to-face conversation or even an Internet forum. Luigifan18 (talk) 20:37, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Debates with LonerBox, Destiny, YUGOPNIK, and Keffals (who has a Wikipedia article). DaRealPrinceZuko (talk) 20:54, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Having a Wikipedia article is irrelevant, we don't care about notability, we care about missionality. BE is just over the line of having enough subscribers, that isn't in dispute, what's in dispute is whether this article is relevant to RW's mission. Plutocow (talk) 20:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
And I literally addressed how BadEmpanada having an article and elaborating on his debates with other streamers and his controversies (i.e. accusations of antisemitism and Holodomor denial) should be relevant to RW's mission. DaRealPrinceZuko (talk) 21:03, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Draft:Lily Orchard | Result: Deleted by author[edit]

Draft:Lily Orchard (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. What is Lily Orchard's relevance to RW's mission? We don't need to cover every YouTuber who's a shitty person (otherwise we'd need pages on Onision, Jaystation, etc.) Plutocow (talk) 04:26, 7 March 2024 (UTC) Plutocow (talk) 04:26, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. I tend to agree to be honest there has to be a little more involved to be relevant to RW for me, this is a waste of everybody's time updating the page . EditorialMaster (talk) 04:41, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

  1. Why was the draft deleted before the afd was completed? Carthage (talk) 04:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
    It was deleted by the person who created it, which is fair. This AfD is now closed. Plutocow (talk) 04:58, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

File:BRUH.wav | Result: Annihilated[edit]

File:BRUH.wav (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Likely AI-generated and even if not is out of context and likely done with the intent of smearing a living person. Easy delete. Plutocow (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 19:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  3. BobJohnson (talk) 19:56, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  4. Cringe. Luigifan18 (talk) 20:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

February 2024[edit]

Swami Vishwananda | Result: Keep[edit]

Swami Vishwananda (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. highly subjective attack page, need to protect the rights of a living person. See the article about Vishwananda on Wikipedia VarahaDas (talk) 12:50, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. Deletion attempt is an attempt at whitewashing the person. Nominator is not here in good faith. Lavalizard101 (talk) 13:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 13:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
  3. Carthage (talk) 13:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
  4. I'm not seeing where the article would not come under our mission statements. It might help the person who proposed the deletion if they learned how to actually format the deletion request and, furthermore, it would be more convincing if this deletion request were not their only contribution to the wiki.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
  5. I suggest keep , i agree the user having this as there only contribution smells BerlinEditor (talk) 16:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
  6. The originator of this request is obviously ignorant of RationalWiki's purpose. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 17:07, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
  7. Plutocow (talk) 17:11, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Amino acid/List of amino acids | Result: Denatured[edit]

Amino acid/List of amino acids (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. There's no point to this. The same information is in amino acid, but the table on this page isn't even transcluded there, leaving it completely redundant. Plutocow (talk) 23:19, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. This version is inferior to the one on the amino acid page. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 talk 00:01, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
  3. Vaporize it. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 00:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
  4. If the table is full and better in the original page, then nuke this one (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 00:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
  5. This isn't Wikipedia. Carthage (talk) 00:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

C0nc0rdance | Result: Discordant[edit]

C0nc0rdance (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. I don't think it's necessary for this article to exist, as this is clearly a non-contraversial rando with only 55,000 subscribers. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 08:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. Doesn't meet the 100,000 subscribers threshold. (Unfortunately, the YouTube channels of people who try to debunk pseudoscience will probably never have as many subscribers as those of the people that spread it.) Spud (talk) 15:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
  3. While I've been starting to turn against reckless deletionism, there doesn't seem to be anything particularly controversial about this person that needs documenting. I wouldn't really call them a rando, though. I have to ask again how Natsuki qualifies what a "nobody" is. Carthage (talk) 15:17, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
    Hey, I'm against that kinda deletion too, but I'm 1) not sure how to give to a concrete, objective threshold for relevance, and 2) certain that surely, this person that uploads every few years isn't really worth having a page on. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 15:25, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
    I don't know. How well known is C0nc0rdance in the activist atheist community? How many view counts have their videos gotten? Anyway, Hbomb only updates once a year nowadays, so your second point seems kind of hollow. You could argue that Hbomb is notable, yes, but that would be extraneous to the argument you're making. The only reason I'm voting in favor is because this person seems non-controversial. This is not an atheist encyclopedia. Carthage (talk) 15:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
  4. It would be worth keeping based on missionality, but it doesn't meet the threshold of subscribers. Bongolian (talk) 19:12, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
    Subscriber count isn't the only measure of relevance… Luigifan18 (talk) 00:51, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
  5. Delete, but before deleting, add a mention to RationalWiki:Websites that summarizes the text in the article. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 19:35, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. Spud's remark about people who debunk pseudoscience struggling to find an audience sounds to me like a good reason to keep this article. Luigifan18 (talk) 17:10, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

NephilimFree | Result: Free no longer[edit]

NephilimFree (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. And yet another boring article written more than ten years ago about an unknown YouTuber. I wonder if we really need Afds for all these pages of if we can just delete them on sigh. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 18:37, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. And almost every goddam reference is to a youtube video that no longer exists. Candidate for speedy deletion. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 18:43, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
  3. Insignificant. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 talk 18:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
  4. 8.57k subs on YouTube? What? And it's literally, "Very dumb man, existing on the interwebs." multiplied by 100. - Rairyu75 (Talk) 18:49, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
  5. A literal nobody where the only people who ever cared about him were crankliest of cranks, burn it. A somebody. (talk) 19:06, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
  6. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 11:11, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
  7. Speedy delete for me, boring. DecemberRebmeced (talk) 02:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. If he's still active on Discord and still bugnuts insane, this page could be useful as "weirdo alert" fodder if nothing else. (He also seems to be one of the main architects of the lunar bukkake hypothesis, so he's at least noteworthy for that.) Luigifan18 (talk) 18:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. Deleting articles based off of subjective and questionable criteria is starting to get really annoying. Perhaps the userbase here should be more focused on contributing to mainspace than removing already existing articles. We've had a dearth of new article creations, if you want an example. Carthage (talk) 11:39, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
I don't disagree with this, it's just, I'm not really sure on the point in having articles on people so obscure (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 11:43, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

  1. As a counterweight to deletion. Carthage (talk) 11:34, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

  1. The criteria we use to determine notability are pretty questionable. Subs alone are an insufficient tool, you also have to take into account video views and wider engagement with the community. NephilimFree may be a "nobody" now, but he wasn't one ten years ago. Carthage (talk) 11:37, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
    The channel, over 13 years, has had 14 videos break 10k views, of which 2 were posted in the last decade. It's not clear to me that that constitutes having not been a nobody at any point (he certainly is one now, having averaged mid-hundreds views for several years). Even if he was a somebody on YouTube 10 years ago, that doesn't seem to be a less subjective or questionable criterion for notability than what's being appealed to here.
    Besides that, the article does little more than tell me what he believes. Refutations of those beliefs are housed elsewhere on the site, specifically on the articles that address the relevant ideas, which makes it dubious whether this article contributes substantially to the site's mission. It does not contribute to the documentation of crank ideas; there's no ideas in this article that aren't addressed better elsewhere on the site, and a copy-paste of the arguments from those articles to this one would not improve the wiki. Likewise, there's no real analysis or criticism here, either, and again there would be little point in adding any, since such analysis and criticism already exists elsewhere on the wiki; knowing that creationists (say) are vulnerable to objection X, I gain nothing from being told that the particular creationist NephilimFree is vulnerable to objection X. While the site can be improved by the creation of new articles, it can also be improved by the revision or removal of content that is non-missional, redundant, and obscure. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 talk 19:23, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Category:Compilations | Result: Decompiled[edit]

Category:Compilations (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. We have Category:Lists, I don't see how this category is supposed to be different. Plutocow (talk) 20:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. Seems redundant and unnecessary. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 22:55, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
  3. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 02:48, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. Category:Lists is for smaller-scale lists that are just individual sentences, while this is for more detailed stuff. Luigifan18 (talk) 01:13, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
    That's not really enough of a distinction to be worth a separate category, especially as the former type of article has been increasingly frowned upon here. Plutocow (talk) 22:32, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
    I made this largely to be a super-category for the glossaries and FAQs, as well as articles that follow a similar format of "lists of things that are noteworthy enough to be included on the wiki, but either can't individually be covered comprehensively enough to warrant having their own articles or are served well by having a single article summarizing a wide variety of things about a given subject (like RationalWiki:Pissed at us)". So while, yes, there would be some overlap between this and Category:Lists, there's enough difference in scope for them to be separate things. Luigifan18 (talk) 00:10, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Draft:Pridnestrovie | Result: Dosvidanya, propaganda![edit]

Draft:Pridnestrovie (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Article seems to be Russian propaganda, as pointed out in the talk page. There are also large sections without any citations. Enough work would need to be done to fix these issues that it'd be better off to start from scratch. Plutocow (talk) 13:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. The creator's comment in the "Merge/redrect" section makes it clear their aim is indeed to spread Russian propaganda here. That ain't gonna happen. Spud (talk) 15:38, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
  3. Seems to have nothing whatsoever to do with the RW mission. I guess they couldn't get it onto WP.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 16:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
  4. I have to agree with Bob and change my position, I was wrong when I started writing this article. However, the point is not so much that it does not fit into the format of the project, but rather the obsessive and unfair accusations of "Russian propaganda," which directly indicates that the project itself performs political propaganda functions and does not disdain lies. I have no desire to participate in this. Malorussian Man (talk) 17:45, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
  5. The problem with the article is lack of missionality and partisanship of the author. We don't people to write mainspace pages about themselves, nor should we allow political partisans to write all or most of a page on their own ideology (i.e. creating propaganda). The idea that someday there will be an independent state of Pridnestrovie (as implied in the lede) represented at the UN is rather more farfetched than that it continues to exist as an unrecognized rump state of Russia, becomes an formally autonomous part of Moldova, or even becomes part of greater Russia in a Putinesque fantasy-come-true. Bongolian (talk) 18:26, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
  6. Does not seem to contribute to RW's mission and instead serves as a way of making Russia look good by showing how "friendly and human" their small towns are. So essentially, propaganda. Given this wiki's stance on such things, especially with the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian War, this is in rather poor taste and definitely belongs elsewhere besides this wiki. Delete. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 21:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

  1. I suggest using the new article as a replacement for the extremely biased, offensive and unhelpful "Transnistria" article, from which a redirect should be established. The subject in the form of the Pridnestrovian Republic (to which the "Transnistria" article refers) is described in the new article along with the historical and geographical region of Pridnestrovie in the appropriate context. Of course, the article still needs to be improved, which needs to be done further. Malorussian Man (talk) 14:16, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

  • To at least some extent a merge is possible. I think even if it ends up deleted, some stuff can be salvaged. For example, it mentions the extent of electrical power generation and some other valuable things in the breakaway state, and this info would also be good for explaining how it is used as leverage in geopolitics, as this centers around Moldova being dependent in those areas. Some may also be kept or reworked on the further history of the region, and the controversy surrounding the name used for the breakaway state, maybe more. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 16:28, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Not going to comment on the state of the article itself, but I do think critically analyzing what exactly drove Pridnestrovie/Transnistria to secession in the first place should be on the cards here if we're gonna have an article on the subject at all. Also a criticism could be made that we are ideologically inconsistent in our support for the self-determination of Taiwan but not Pridnestrovie. There are also clearly elements of the article here that could be reworded for our article on Transnistria, as others have already pointed out. Carthage (talk) 09:07, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

AprilStudios | Result: Forced to flip the calendar to May[edit]

AprilStudios (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. The YouTube channel this article is about fails to meet the required number of subscribers listed in RW's notability standards by over 10,000 subs, and given that the channel has been inactive for a while and that the article itself is rather poorly written, I imagine it can be safely removed from the wiki. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 06:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
  2. I suppose it's nothing too exceptional. Chillpilled (talk) 06:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
  3. i did note they have 89k subscribers but after almost 1 year without uploads i agreed it is not notable, maybe if the videos start to increase again they can be looked at EditorialMaster (talk) 19:29, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
  4. Nothing of value will be lost if this one is consigned to the bit bucket. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 19:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
  5. Doesn't meet the 100k criteria. Also dead channel. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 23:59, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
  6. In accordance with site standards. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 talk 01:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
  7. They've been inactive for over a year. And unless their channel makes a comeback, they seemed to have fucked off into obscurity. That and the article is generally too snarked. Patty Pat 01:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

January 2024[edit]

Creation Social Science and Humanities Quarterly | Result: Keep[edit]

Creation Social Science and Humanities Quarterly (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Just yet another stub written over a decade about about another dead, obscure site. We've seen this dozens of times. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 21:47, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. A relic from a bygone era, when this site was still just Human and Armondikov fucking around. The early editors had an unfortunate tendency to make “stubby-wubbies” for every minor creationist webshite nobody would care about a year afterwards. Banish it to the Backrooms --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularREmail2.gifasoningSee what I've been messing around with 23:57, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. If for nothing else, this is worth keeping for the absolutely hilarious topics and their treatment in many of the pieces put forth in this pseudojournal. Yes, it is obscure and dormant, but it's a prime example of the stupid stuff fundies waste their time on. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 00:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
    If we just want to laugh at them, I think that adding them to the webshite list would be better than a tiny main space article. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 13:31, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. One of these days, the only site that won't be dead and obscure will be TikTok. "Creationists do social science" looks at least a little bit novel to me. Chillpilled (talk) 13:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. Carthage (talk) 13:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. If it's "just another", is there somewhere to put a list of these documenting them? That'd be useful as well as on-mission. Until then, keep this - David Gerard (talk) 23:29, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

This one I'm torn on. The article is definitely quite stubby. However, this is sort of the type of fundamentalist crank that Rationalwiki can cover when no other Wiki would.

Briefly: this was a "magazine" run from 1978 to 1994 by a Paul D. Ackerman, whose profession (until 2018 at least) was the assistant psychology chair at Witchita State University. As per this link, [1] the "zine" essentially tried to pattern itself on the slightly larger Creation Research Society, except that the purpose of this zine was to provide creationist perspectives for "fields outside the natural science" (eg creation science, but applied to humanities and social sciences). From archives of a web copy of his book "It's a Young World After All", he's a young earth creationist; acknowledgements for this book do include other creationist folks with RW articles, Carl Wieland and Ken Ham.

So... on the one hand, this essentially is a creationist pseudojournal / "fanzine" of little importance in "the real world" with a small number of members at its peak (according to this 1993 article,[2] 600), plus (as the current article mentions) a seemingly very narrow contributor list. On the other hand... this topic hits *many* of the mission points and has connections with more notable creationist RW figures. Hmm...

Archives are available at the creationism.org link in the article, along with the Internet archive. So I guess this is the sort of article that could be spruced up by combing through the archives and appending the most WTF moments (if anyone gave a hoot, of course, which usually doesn't happen...). What to do with it now, I don't know... BobJohnson (talk) 23:55, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

  1. What the fuck is this? Carthage (talk) 01:19, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Demand side economics | Result: Entered a recession[edit]

Demand side economics (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. I don't remember ever reading about "Demand side economics", though some reliable pages do have articles about it, including Wikipedia. That being said, it's apparently a very small thing. I've started draft:fiscal policy as an alternative to this article. Guess that most people trust that I can at least write a better article than this one. It won't be a very long article, so I expect I can finish it in a month or two (though I'm not promising anything, I work on a slow schedule). One last thing, all the sources from the article are dead, and IMO we should just delete unsourced stuff. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 21:51, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. Poorly sourced stub. I support deletion and revisiting the topic in a future article. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 22:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. Poorly sourced, and most of what I see indicates that "demand side economics" is, by and large, a synonym for Keynesian economics. BobJohnson (talk) 22:09, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. Melt in fluoroantimonic acidWikipedia --Goatspeed. Stalk meCircularREmail2.gifasoningMy experiments 23:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Fun:Minute of hate | Result: Went to see a shrink, and got its anger issues resolved[edit]

Fun:Minute of hate (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. More low-effort garbage, it can go too. Plutocow (talk) 04:02, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. Chillpilled (talk) 04:25, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. cosmikdebris talk stalk 04:31, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. Five words and an emoji does not a funspace article make. Spud (talk) 06:00, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  5. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 20:37, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
  6. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 20:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
  7. Not funny and just plain stupid, hopelessly tiny stub. --Goatspeed. Watch meCircularREmail2.gifasoningMy experiments 21:16, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

It really is crap. But as funspace has no standards (that I can think of) I'm not sure of the basis of the deletion. It also seems to me that we would be better off building the real wiki than navelgazing irrelevant funspace stuff.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 17:07, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Ditto. Carthage (talk) 20:44, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Fun:Emo | Result: CRAWLING IN MY SKIN[edit]

Fun:Emo (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. I know funspace doesn't have standards per se, but that doesn't mean we should keep this low-effort garbage. Plutocow (talk) 03:59, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. Garbo Chillpilled (talk) 04:23, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. Might have been funny once. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 04:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. - Rairyu75 (Talk) 05:11, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  5. Six words does not a funspace article make. Spud (talk) 05:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Anti-Oedipus | Result: Keep[edit]

AfDs for this article:
Anti-Oedipus (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Disorganized and poorly sourced, written without proper expertise on the subject. Pfelix (talk) 12:01, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

# Carthage (talk) 13:17, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. None of the reasons given are reasons for deleting the article. They are all reasons for improving the article. Improving on-mission articles is always better than deleting them. Arguments along the lines of "I could improve it but I don't have time - so the community should delete it" are simply absurd. If you can fix it - then fix it - don't ask the community to kill it if your can't be bothered.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Move it to draft space? I'd rather have high-quality articles than low-quality hack pieces. Carthage (talk) 14:23, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Think it should be kept in mainspace right now for the following reasons;
    a) It's an on-mission article.
    b) WP's edition is almost unreadable to the layperson. Running segments through Flesch–Kincaid checkers has it scoring between 23 and 29, which has it tagged as 'Very difficult to read. Best understood by university graduates' and I would add '...of a related field'. This means our edition is even more needed, as I have an informal rule that we should try to have our pages at about 60, max [ie readable to an average 16 year-old].
    c) A poor-quality article can be seen as a challenge for improvement, including perhaps even pissing off someone enough to join up and 'sort it out' [hell, worked on me!].
    KarmaPolice (talk) 12:29, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. --Goatspeed. Stalk meCircularREmail2.gifasoningSee what I've been messing around with 13:31, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

  1. More articles are being deleted than are being created, but this article is undeniably low-quality. Move it to draftspace where (presumably) Pfelix can work on it? Carthage (talk) 14:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

Hey, so the reasons why I think this page should be deleted is the following:

  1. The text is really disorganized and confusing. It jumps all over the place and is hard to understand the summary of the book or the critique.
  2. There are few citations and a lot of the article is just the opinion of the authors. (We should also strive to have good citations too - not just citations that repeat the Sokal Affair)
  3. A LOT of errors, I just glanced through the schizophrenia section, but it was really rocky. A lot of unsourced and highly opinionated claims that would be better off sourced from somewhere else.
  4. The article appears to have been written initially by an enthusiastic but not-well-read fan of the book, and then progressively edited over time by other people who did not like or understand the book. This contributes towards the confusion of the article but also leads to serious tone and quality shifts.
  5. It would just be better in 90% of circumstances to link the Wikipedia article because it's more clear. If the critique is just "its too confusing", well, most people will probably be confused by the Wikipedia summary too, so... but at least that article is a lot more accurate.

We could possibly rewrite it but it would need to be done from scratch. I agree there is a lot of value of having critiques of this book available on the internet, but I think it should be sourced. If we don't have the time/resources to source these critiques I think we should just delete, link from Wikipedia and re-create the page when we are able to actually assemble those sources. Pfelix (talk) 12:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

If you are really prepared (sometime) to write a superior article then you can start one in you personal space (or draft space)and then overwrite this one. But a probably better course of action would be to simply improve this one (when you have the time).Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Schizoids.net | Result: Burned with napalm fire[edit]

Draft:Schizoids.net (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Not notable. Draft created by user Critical Rationalist solely due to a grudge. 80.43.34.98 (talk) 12:33, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    Aside from being motivated by personal grievances, the author also has a storied history of either poor reading comprehension or intentional misrepresentations of people's stated views; should not be considered a reliable narrator. FemtwinkDreamboat (talk) 14:52, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    Going by the, erm, colorful ranting Critical Rationalist is engaging in, I'm inclined to agree with that assessment. However, the page itself seems to be on-mission, so I'm not sure if deleting it is the right way to go. Luigifan18 (talk) 16:05, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. Kill it with fire --Goatspeed. Watch meCircularREmail2.gifasoningSee my experiments 15:50, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. Unnecessary drama boiling over from an obscure forum that no one appears to give a shit about except for the people who participate there. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 17:07, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 17:22, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  5. ApooftGnegiol (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  6. Delete, and Critical Rationalist deserves at least a slap on the face for using this site to advance offsite drama. Plutocow (talk) 18:09, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  7. Lacks notability. Bongolian (talk) 18:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  8. I just saw Critical Rationality's latest tirade on their talk page, and I feel like I have little choice but to say screw this noise, it was not written in good faith. It's rare that I vote to delete something, but I'm getting sick of this crap. Luigifan18 (talk) 19:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. Merely a draft, not in mainspace. Some Putinist COVID-denialist pseudoscientific Trump-bots got angry.Critical Rationalist (talk) 13:16, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    There it is again. The kitchen sink of pejoratives you throw at anyone you take a dislike to for whatever reason. I wonder, I really do, how it is that you made yourself so unpopular on schizoids.net.80.43.34.98 (talk) 13:57, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    No-one cares you about your Trumpist, Putin-wiorshipping, Covid-denialist echochamber, you dumb cunt. I bet all men with reason would be "unpopular" there. Critical Rationalist (talk) 14:12, 7 January 2024 (UTC)!~
    If no one cares about this alleged echo chamber, then why did you go to the trouble of drafting an article about it? You would still be a member if you'd behaved like a reasonable human being. I gave you so much advice and you ignored all of it. I told you: listen to what people are actually saying; don't straw man and lie about everyone; don't make ad hominem and vicious insults a first resort; don't project your own flaws onto others. You just could not change, and now here you are. Good luck in your future endeavours. I hope you learn to listen as much as you talk.80.43.34.98 (talk) 14:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    Stick yo your Putin-Nazi [3] woshipping echochambers, losers. No-one in the world at large cares about you, dwelllers of the Plato's Cave, idiots, we merely laugh you. And we do so brutally. Critical Rationalist (talk) 15:01, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    We are very grateful that you are so openly displaying the reasons for your involuntary departure from schizoids.net. No need to add anything really, it speaks for itself. FemtwinkDreamboat (talk) 15:06, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    I can kill you anywhhere in mainstream spaes.If it is war that you want, then war you shall get get.You COVID denialist Putinbots will get a war anywhere.Critical Rationalist (talk) 15:57, 7 January 2024 (UTC)!
    You're not helping your case. Luigifan18 (talk) 16:07, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

#This is a very tentative keep vote, on account of the website as described being missional. On the other hand, the author is clearly a raving loon who appears to just be ranting and sharpening an axe, which makes me wonder if the page was created in bad faith. Luigifan18 (talk) 16:03, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

  1. Faith is irrelevant. We either want to mock 9/11 denialists and covid denialists and Putinbots, or we don't.Wikipedia asssumes good faith, we dont't. Critical Rationalist (talk) 16:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    No, we do assume good-faith. Please, check RationalWiki:Community Standards. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 16:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    Assuming good faith is one of the only reasons why I voted to keep this (the other being RationalWiki's mission). I will rescind that vote if Critical Rationalist gives me good reason to doubt that assumption of good faith. As is, I'm already teetering on the edge after their ad hominem attacks and macho-violent-strongman posturing. Luigifan18 (talk) 16:48, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    Putin-worshipping sociopaths deserve no good faith is all I can say [4].Critical Rationalist (talk) 17:03, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    And my keep vote is gone, along with my patience. Flinging verbal abuse is no way to win friends. Or arguments. Luigifan18 (talk) 19:46, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

  1. This whole fucking thing is phenomenally stupid. Carthage (talk) 16:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. It's like watching 2 kids fighting over a toy... Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 16:19, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. This is the sort of moment that makes me glad for not being a moderator anymore. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 16:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    Do you think this might be ATIM-worthy? Luigifan18 (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    This is so mind-numbingly stupid that moving it to ATIM would be a stupendous waste of time, and also, giving unnecessary oxygen to a flamewar that is best done elsewhere. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 17:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    I agree now. It's an idiot echochamber with 8 regulars and deserves no mention in the free world mainstream. The site is whimsical for its nuttyness, but there are subreddits with more regulars equally dumb and nuttyy. Critical Rationalist (talk) 17:15, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    The one thing that may speak for ATIM, or instead simply a shorter block as this seems straightforward, is that "Critical Rationalist" has gone after the IP and user and taunting them on their talk pages. I deleted the taunts at Talk:FemtwinkDreamboat‎, I'd advise not adding any more. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 18:21, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    I gave a nine hour block for the user's general debauchery. If this behavior continues, it can go to ATIM. Plutocow (talk) 18:48, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    Aaaand they just attacked you and the entire website on their talk page. Le sigh. Luigifan18 (talk) 19:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Andrew Wilson | Result: Wiped[edit]

Andrew Wilson (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. This guy only has 28.8K followers on YouTube,[5] well-below our minimum of 100K (RationalWiki:Community Standards#Notability). Bongolian (talk) 18:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Candidate for speedy deletion. There's no need to give this assclown any oxygen. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 19:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Even if this guy was bigger, the stub doesn't even challenge his ideas. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. There are lots of grifters like this guy on youtube. I wouldn't want an article about him even if he had the requisite number of subs. He seems like a "heel" that debate-based podcasts use to represent the dumb-side of any argument.Ariel31459 (talk) 20:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

  • Isn't Matt Dillahunty kinda well known? Why would he debate this guy... (and why the f@ck would people watch them debate? Don't they know they can just watch porn instead? Are they stupid?) - Rairyu75 (Talk) 19:40, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
  • As I said when I created the page, it wasn't clear to me if he warranted a page. I wasn't aware of the notability guidelines. I sort of just made this because I was infuriated by him one night. If it's not a page we should have, delete it. My only note is that it's worth mentioning is that from what I understand his channel has been growing pretty rapidly in the past few months. So he might warrant a page one day? But again, I don't care if it gets deleted. Monochroma (talk) 20:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Human brain size | Result: Brained[edit]

Human brain size (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. Per recent documentation on ATIM, the page was largely written by a troll. A concern on the talk page is that it was written to present a pro-racialist case without substantially criticizing or refuting it (one of the arguments made in the original version of the page was that certain authors are "cisgender, heterosexual white men"; this was removed in 2021). I see two options to proceed: we can delete the page, or else one or more editors familiar with the topic can step up to substantially revamp it, including a good presentation of counter-arguments. Lacking this, I believe it would be better to delete the page until a better presentation can be made. Chillpilled (talk) 23:40, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Carthage (talk) 00:40, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. Yeah, after reading this article again, I concur with Chillpilled that this subject is noteworthy, but a much better treatment can be given than the one that's here now. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 00:50, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. Yeah, deleting seems to be the best option. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 01:00, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Fun:EncyclopediaDramaticaTroll | Result: Smoking crater[edit]

Fun:EncyclopediaDramaticaTroll (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

  1. I'm not sure that encouraging people raiding our wiki, even as a joke, should be encouraged. I also see this becoming a troll magnet. Plutocow (talk) 00:46, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. You're much too tolerant. This type of shit is completely off-topic for this place, even as a funspace article. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 00:53, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]