RationalWiki's 2019 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $3680Goal: $6000

RationalWiki:Articles for deletion

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
There are 2 pages marked for deletion:
For the German political party known as AfD, see Alternative für Deutschland.

Some articles on RationalWiki are ripe for plucking and 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 and the users are active.

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).

If the article you are attempting to create an AfD page for has had an AfD before, you will have to create a new subpage manually. Preferably, make it useful and easy to refer to in the future, such as putting the month or date or a version number of the second Afd.

If you are attempting to merge the article with another, PLEASE DO NOT USE THIS PAGE. That belongs at RationalWiki:Duplicate articles.

Also, if you think an article is substandard but still potentially on-mission, remember that a move to Draft: space might be sufficient.

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 {{RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Article}}.
  3. Go to the 2018 archives and add {{RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Article}} at the top of the stack.

After deleting, add Category:Talk pages for deleted articles to the talk page if it has one.

Mark Foley | Result: ?[edit]

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


  1. Not exactly necessary and stub. DiamondDisc1(talk) 04:52, 10 October 2018 (UTC)



  1. Seems like a short note as an example of Haggard's Law. Maybe merge to that one instead. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:28, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  2. Merge with Haggard's Law. Cosmikdebris (talk) 22:30, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  3. Yep, this would make an excellent addition to the Haggard's Law article. -BP9 23:06, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  4. Merge with Haggard's Law, but keep the photo and caption. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 00:05, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  5. Sounds good. I also agree with GC that we should keep the photo. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 00:44, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
  6. As above. Nerd (talk) 00:52, 18 October 2018 (UTC)


Category:Alt-righters | Result: ?[edit]

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


  1. I don't think it's particularly useful to have a separate category for alt-right personalities, considering most of our alt-right articles are about the personalities. Just put them in Category:Alt-right. (Btw, a lot already are and having both categories at the bottom just looks silly.) (talk) 08:07, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
  2. It's an unnecessary subcategory. CowHouse (talk) 04:59, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
  3. Agreed. Spud (talk) 05:57, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
  4. Yeah, it seems pretty redundant. Binarystep (talk) 06:39, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
  5. Do away with redundant categories. RoninMacbeth (talk) 16:42, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
  6. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 00:55, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
  7. Nerd (talk) 00:51, 18 October 2018 (UTC)


  1. There are 54 articles in this category. The parent category has 63 articles about alt-right slogans, websites, mkovements and organisations. Even considering a small number of those are one-person bands, there are still enough to be worth keeping the two separate. (talk) 11:00, 4 October 2018 (UTC) (Sophie)
    So, why not merge the subcategories? Are you sure those don't overlap already with Category:Alt-right? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 17:32, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
    Why not give a reasion beyond "why not?" Maybe it's better to keep individual people distinct from groups, slogans and concepts. (talk) 07:02, 10 October 2018 (UTC) (Sophie)
    My question, since it wasn't clear, was a semi-rhetorical one. How the categories are organized is all over the place. We don't have Category:Sexists Or Category:Ableists (but we have Category:Sexism and Category:Ableism), but we do have both on Category:Racists/Category:Racism and Category:Anti-Semites/Category:Anti-Semitism and Category:Homophobes/Category:Homophobia. We have individuals/organizations categorized in Homophobia and Racism also despite the categorizes for individuals/organizations existing. My point is we really need to clean up categories and apply some consistency here. While we do have split categories for individuals and the concepts, the overlapping thing is a problem, and this isn't helping, so I think we should discuss that first before we have a category that does little to distinguish between individuals/organizations and concepts. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:20, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
  2. I agree with the BoN above, the "Alt-righters" sub-cat serves its purpose. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 11:21, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
    the BON? Blimey, log out round here and suddenly you're chopped liver. (talk) 12:52, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
    Given that I have no idea who you are outside a Bunch of Numbers (BoN), what else should I refer to you as? Sam? Bob? Dave? Sally? Alice? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 13:09, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
    I had hoped that putting my name in brackets at the end might be some sort of clue... (talk) 13:19, 4 October 2018 (UTC) (Sam, Bob, Dave, Sally, Alice Sophie)
    Ah, my apologies. Given that your original post lacks your usual signature I was unaware that it was you. EDIT: I apparently need more caffeine, since the signature is indeed there.☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 13:26, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
    And maybe I need to come up with yet another Marcel Duchamp-based username as my latest LANCB has gone the way of all the others :( (talk) 13:41, 4 October 2018 (UTC) (Sophie)
  3. Tinribmancer (talk) 16:37, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
  4. James Earl Cash (talk) 00:51, 13 October 2018 (UTC)



I have on specific concern: doesn't the wording we've chosen sound dumb? "righters" that sounds like a 1980s british neologism. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 01:50, 18 October 2018 (UTC)