RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Anatoly Karlin

Anatoly Karlin | Result: Keep

Anatoly Karlin (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete

1. Article was only created since Karlin attacked the creator of the Emil Kirkegaard's RationalWiki article on UNZ Review, so it was basically a retaliation, e.g. see here. Karlin is totally non-noticeable and is a random white nationalist/'race realist'/human biodiversity crank. There are of course other HBD pseudo-scientists covered by RationalWiki, but Karlin (if you look at his UNZ Review posts) is a lowbrow 'shit poster' who posts racism and isn't more noticeable like Hbdchick or Steve Sailer. I don't think he deserves an article; as also mentioned the article was only created as a retaliation. Agent47 (talk) 20:11, 14 April 2018

So he doesn't like his article, a lot of cranks don't like their articles and claim all sorts of "nefarious" reasons for said dislike. Why should what he thinks matter? If the article is well sourced then his opinion is irrelevant. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 20:23, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm saying the article was written as part of a grudge and feud, so should be deleted. Karlin is an attack-dog for Emil Kirkegaard and Kirkegaard got him to write an article on Unz Review attacking the person who wrote his RationalWiki article. That person then retaliated by creating the Karlin article on RationalWiki.Agent47 (talk) 20:26, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

The only evidence you cited for the claim that this article is a hatchet job is a UNZ post by the subject. What you fail to understand is that the subject may have ulterior motives for dismissing the article. Again, what matters is the quality of the article in question, not what the subject thinks about it. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 20:45, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm the article creator. I admit my mistakes. I got attacked/trolled by posters on UNZ Review, over Emil Kirkegaard's RationalWiki article; I should have ignored them. Prior to article creation I contacted Karlin on Twitter to refute the nonsense he was posting about me on UNZ; he then started trolling me on Twitter. So I retaliated by creating the Karlin article, but that didn't help the situation. I don't think the article is relevant or needed.Agent47 (talk) 21:06, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

This isn't your first time trying to delete an article based on alleged harassment by the subjects or their colleagues. You seem to have a pattern of trying to put the genie back in the bottle, @Agent47. Unlike Wikipedia, lack of notability is not a strong reason to remove an article on RW. If the article is completely inaccurate or unsubstantiated, then that's a good reason to delete it. If there are just a few things wrong or unsubstantiated then we can delete or correct those parts. Bongolian (talk) 00:04, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Keep

1. Keep, there isn't any real reason to delete this article at present. ^{— Unsigned, by: GrammarCommie / talk / contribs}
2. Keep, despite the smarmy events claimed in its history. Cosmikdebris (talk) 23:30, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
3. Keep. Bongolian (talk) 00:08, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
4. Keep. As the "subject", I get a vote, right? The world must be made aware of my insane levels of hate. Akarlin (talk) 00:52, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
5. Keep. DuceMoosolini (talk) 21:58, 21 April 2018 (UTC)