RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Laci Green

Laci Green | Result: Keep

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Delete

 * 1) "Honestly. This article is 25% Green's sayings (sans meaningful discussion) 75% documentation of InternetDrama™ minutiae (also sans meaningful discussion). I frankly can't how see a skeptical reader would gain anything from this article. I propose we move the intro, an abbreviated quote, and the citations about harassment to RationalWiki:Websites. Green is a useful resource, perhaps, but we do Green no justice with this article."  05:31, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Whilst I wouldn't say this for a two line stub, why not improve the article if you (appear to) think it's on mission? Christopher (talk) 19:49, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The quoted text is FCP's from the talk page. 21:22, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Aye. 19:20, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Of course you agree, you're the person who said the quoted text! 21:18, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Delete. Not missional. She's not important. For those who say she is, the burden is on you to convince us why she is. She's just some YouTube vlogger who gets shit from some assholes on the internet. Has anyone actually watched her videos? I have and they teach absolutely nothing!90.197.152.115 (talk) 20:33, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * This discussion is from ages ago, start a second one. Christopher (talk) 20:35, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Keep

 * 1) I've never seen a minute of her content, but she seems to be under attack by quite a few assholes? Not to sound like Jerry Seinfeld here, but What's the deal with all the internet trolls getting triggered from watching a female try to do anything? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 09:07, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The above quote is FCP ptoato's, but here's my take: Laci Green is an example of a larger issue at hand: men hating on women for having something which challenges an idea. I think it would do better justice to have an article / section of an article elaborating on Anti-feminists rather than further prolonging the Internet drama related to Laci Green. I think we should focus more on the crank individuals rather than the attacked, it's better for Green this way. 21:40, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, that sounds reasonable. But what does deletion have to do with that? Not being flip; just trying to understand. I did think your description here seemed sensible (I just don't get where deletion enters in?) Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:32, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't mind. The point: Most, if not all, the content on Laci Green's article is about her persecution. I don't think Laci Green deserves to be known for her this. The article focuses on Internet drama, we shouldn't draw attention to these asshole, especially with the attacked person being the article's name. 22:48, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, "draw attention to it"... We're calling out the persecutors on what they're doing to her. That's almost the point of an article on her. I mean, we call out bullshit, and fundamentalist/antifeminists persecuting anyone is missional, it seems to me. Or am I missing something here? I very well could be, but I'm confused about what you mean? Hehe. ^^ Reverend Black Percy (talk) 00:20, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Well I suppose I'm doing a bad arguing my case, aren't I? Sometimes I write good and sometime I doesn't. [sic] Marking this as keep. 00:35, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


 * 1) Keep - David Gerard (talk) 16:35, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * 2) I think this can benefit from expansion rather than deletion. I think this is relevant to RationalWiki since we should cover those who offer ideas that agree with us as well as the ones that disagree (that range from cognent to batnuts). When in doubt, try expanding rather than deleting. 18:33, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * 3) Certainly missional. Christopher (talk) 18:43, 7 April 2017 (UTC)