RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Draft:Oliver D.Smith

Draft:Oliver D.Smith | Result: Deleted

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Delete

 * 1) He is a complete and utter nobody. The only reason for this page to exist is to celebrate pointless drama that is best forgotten. Not only will having an article about his arch-nemesis encourage Mikemikev to come here even more often, it will only encourage Smith himself to sock up again. And he's already a big-headed fucking turd. We don't need to make him feel more important. Spud (talk) 15:00, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) Complete nobody, no one on this wiki would’ve heard of him if he didn’t interact with the site personally. Christopher (talk) 15:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) So like...beyond rationalwiki what does this guy do that merits an article?-Flandres (talk) 15:09, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 4) There is absolutely no need for an article on this person here. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 15:20, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 5) Insignificant subject. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒  talk  15:29, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 6) Delete per all of the above. -Gale5050 (talk) 15:57, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 7) Dipose and disinect. 16:10, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 8) Delete. Looks like a vandal shrine to me. - Immigrant laborer (talk) 16:18, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep

 * 1) I noticed it was deleted, but there's actually Lots of crank magnetism and fringe-beliefs you can dig up on the guy. Smith thinks Troy was located at a different site to Hisarlik, rejecting the archaeological consensus (he has a paper preprint not yet passed peer-review while he published another paper last year in an ultra-low tier undergrad journal), he disagrees with the mainstream Out of Africa hypothesis for human evolution, he writes on geo-mythology and many of his writings on that subject can be described at best as fringe and speculative, while many of his cryptozoology writings are skeptical, some of his views are more fringe such as a 2019 conference paper in which he argues "pseudo-Neanderthals" i.e. individual humans with ~5% Neanderthal DNA could be the basis of wildmen and satyrs in classical Greek myths), he was a former believer in Atlantis but later changed his mind a became a skeptic authoring a peer-reviewed paper - his paper is the main source on the  Wikipedia article, but despite his skepticism you can dig up his old fringe views on Atlantis; he's apparently developing his own hypothesis of a non-spiritual afterlife (he seems to believe in some ground-hog day scenario where you relive your memories over and over when you die), plenty of other odd, fringe and crank/pseudo-scientific ideas you could probably dig up if you look around.58.152.137.56 (talk) 16:57, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Sounds like gossip to me. 17:09, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Goat
I've moved it to my userspace, that should help avoid drama, and is the natural place to put these things. 15:19, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * On this occasion, I don't think it even belongs in userspace. There could still be consequences for the entire wiki, not just one user. And just why document this pathetic loser's stupid internet drama? Spud (talk) 15:25, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * [EC]The natural place to put these things is “nowhere”. You’re free to do (almost) whatever you want in your own userspace, but this is still a waste of your time and will do the opposite of “restrain [his boldness]” if it does anything at all. Christopher (talk) 15:26, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Summa just pulled the classic "Superstar Maneuver." When you've created an article that pretty much everybody else doesn't want, just hide it in your userspace, where it will gather dust safe from the prying eyes of people who have a vague idea what this wiki is about! It's not like the community prides itself on by run by consensus often expressed through votes! Honestly we should remember the precedent set here. If we don't delete a hopelessly off-mission internet drama article that everybody else wants gone because one person said "U S E R S P A C E," that opens up a window for people to create all kinds of garbage and secure it the moment somebody questions it. Hate to sound like I'm invoking the slippery slope fallacy, but soon we could have stuff like this on everything from favorite TV shows to toxic-yet-hopelessly-obscure offsite drama which then spills to the wiki.-Flandres (talk) 16:11, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think user subpage to just a favorite TV show is still more preferable than user subpage devoted to Oliver Smith, tbh. 16:16, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ideally, would delete this himself. Christopher (talk) 16:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)