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

December 2024[edit]

Christ myth theory | Result: Myth busted[edit]

Christ myth theory – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

I mean, it's Jesus myth theory, but even more vague and confusing. Would not be opposed to sending it to essayspace, but it might as well share the same fate as its deleted sister article. Plutocow (talk) 00:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Everyone already knows it, but I hate these articles. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 00:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Burn it. A somebody. (talk) 02:19, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
It’s not well written, and I can’t figure out what the point is. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄^{Ask about our holiday specials!} 23:35, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

"One of the biggest problems with the "Christ myth" is what it actually means is all over the freaking map largely because Volney and Dupuis had different views regarding the Christ myth, which resulted in a large range of ideas being called "Jesus myth theory", "Christ myth theory", or "Ahistorical Jesus" (including ones that accept Jesus existed as a human being)". How I am even supposed to know who are Volney and Dupuis? GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 00:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
This probably means that the Jesus and Evidence for the historical existence of Jesus Christ pages need to be overhauled too. Spud (talk) 14:28, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Essay:Andrew Schlafly--psychopathology | Result: Sent to the loony bin[edit]

Essay:Andrew Schlafly--psychopathology – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

If we deleted the other page, this should go too as it's diagnosing a real person with a personality disorder and may run into BLP issues. Sure, it's an essay, but it was written by someone unwilling to put their name on it. Plutocow (talk) 23:16, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 23:44, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
JumboWhales (talk) 23:58, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Exactly the same issues as the page we just deleted. Spud (talk) 12:43, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Ick. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 15:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Fun:Andrew Schlafly/MSA | Result: Yeeted into the sun[edit]

Fun:Andrew Schlafly/MSA – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Creepy stalker bullshit. Also, let's not medicalize assholery. We're not psychiatrists. Carthage (talk) 12:15, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Agreed on all points. Spud (talk) 12:24, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Failed stalker shit! I'd be more inclined to keep it if it had loads of actual content... KarmaPolice (talk) 15:25, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
What is even the point of this?! We have loads of other stuff to laugh at Andrew Schlafly over, and he's old news anyways. Also, it's so poorly written that glancing over it to determine how I should vote gave me a minor headache. LeCapraGrande (talk) 15:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
A somebody. (talk) 16:10, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Is there any doubt - burn it with fire! Scream!! (talk) 16:23, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Awful on every level. JumboWhales (talk) 17:05, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Phenomenon | Result: Canceled after one season[edit]

Phenomenon – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Hasn't been updated since 2007. Nothing about the article tells us why it is missional, shows about people performing magic tricks isn't enough to establish missionality otherwise we'd have pages on The Carbonaro Effect and Fool Us. It's not helped by the page just being a recap, and for only two episodes no less. Hell, I'm not sure if it even is enough to count as that, since I still have no idea what is going on in the show besides people doing magic tricks. Is there some kind of other hook here? If not, easy delete. Plutocow (talk) 06:40, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Apparently it was even stinker of a show for the credulous, "Thankfully this will never see the light of day on DVD. If you missed it, be happy you did."[1] Bongolian (talk) 07:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Show was canceled in 2008, doesn't seem interesting based on what I've seen from a quick Googling. (Although the apparent screaming match between Criss Angel and "paranormalist" Jim Callahan in episode two sounds pretty funny.) Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 14:33, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Even though it features some crank purveyors, this show appears be a nothing burger. Usually the real missional ones are those that have enough success to start fooling its fans into the woo rabbit hole, and its pretty clear nobody gives a rat's ass about this show, not even as meme material. And like said already, nobody's properly updated this shite since 2007 anyway. -- DangerousTomaccoUser (talk) 14:53, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
It's a listicle with no citations and no indication of why anyone should give a shit about it. It looks like an unfinished draft. From what I can gather, it's another stupid reality television/game show hybrid that was mercifully canceled after a single season. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 16:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Okay, I looked up the Criss Angel vs Jim Callahan incident and it's actually extremely funny. If nothing else, please watch this video:

Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 14:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Religious moderacy | Result: Hijacked by extremists[edit]

Religious moderacy – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

A crappy stub that has nothing to say. I'mm not sure if there's even much hope of salvaging this, as we already have pages like appeal to moderation and I'm not sure if there's anything else to say be said besides "they aren't as crazy as these fundamentalists!" It's just not needed at this point in time. Plutocow (talk) 03:32, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Not worth keeping. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 03:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm not actually sure what they're getting at here, though personally suspect they're describing the Church of England - that one of it's main appeals now is the fact it's fairly toothless, greige and fairly easily to ignore. KarmaPolice (talk) 03:48, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
I don't understand the point of this article. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 14:39, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

November 2024[edit]

Fun:List of animals killed by humans | Result: Killed by humans[edit]

Fun:List of animals killed by humans – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Not funny, no sources, lots of blank sections, sure I could send this back to draftspace once again but @Rational Dude moved it back to funspace despite not improving the article one bit, so it's now on the chopping block. Plutocow (talk) 01:09, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
Scream!! (talk) 01:12, 17 November 2024 (UTC) Fun?
Looks to be more of an essay than anything else. If it wasn't such a hollow draft, I'd say move it there. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 00:48, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

It’s mostly meant to be sarcasm. I’ll move it back to draft. We need brain! ^{Give us brain!} 00:27, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

I think the page has potential. But that's a bloody awful title. It should be something like "List of animals that humans made extinct". I understood it as meaning all animals that people kill, which would include pigs, cows, chickens, sheep, goats, rats, mice, flies, mosquitoes and dozens more. Spud (talk) 14:47, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
The subject is missional, even for main space. Wikipedia has this Category:Species made extinct by human activities, and I wouldn't mind if we had something similar here, covering in succinct manner how humanity led these animals to extinction. It doesn't even need to an exhaustive list, it could cover only the most important species, such as the dodo and the aurochs. We might even be bold and include some species that are not officially extinc, such as the baiji. However, will it be done? GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 15:13, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Jordan Lasker | Result: Keep[edit]

Jordan Lasker – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

This article is hot garbage. It says very little about Lasker aside from "he did some stuff alongside Emil Kirkgaard" and "he is suspected of having alt accounts on Reddit and Xitter." Like, okay? This is very clearly the product on an online feud, as is made clear by the fact that roughly 3/4ths of this article is focused on shit these suspected "alt accounts" are doing and saying. It's so fucking dumb, and we don't need shit like this on RW. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 20:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
"we don't need shit like this on RW". And how many RW articles have you created? It appears you have created no articles on this website and you only use it a soapbox to complain about your political fears. This is why people are leaving this website in droves. There is hardly any productive users on here. 64.227.41.182 (talk) 23:31, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
"it appears you have created no articles on this website" HAHAHA! You serious? Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 17:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Bro, you haven't created an article in 3 years and in total you have created 6 articles in the space of over 7 years on this website. Is 6 articles a lot in over 7 years? Your 6 articles including Holy Roman Empire, Tiananmen Square Massacre, Iran-Iraq War and French colonial empire are basically copy and paste jobs from Wikipedia. Most people interested in history like that would not use RationalWiki as their number 1 go to, so you haven't helped anyone or debunked anything. You haven't created a single biography. Let us know when you actually become interested in debunking pseudoscience. Perhaps your 2025 new year goal can be to create a decent article on here. 108.61.251.36 (talk) 18:22, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Check my userpage, bud. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 21:04, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
This is the sort of thing that might put us into trouble again. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 21:00, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
It is not proven Lasker is the person who owns the Cremieux Recueil and TrannyPorn0 accounts although the evidence suggests it is very likely (while I did not create the page I added some of this evidence based on quoting a X thread based on evidence someone else compiled) but since it is not proven I don't think it makes sense to have a page if it has not been proven Lasker is Cremieux. I could be wrong though seeming as the Cremieux account is one of the most popular HBD/eugenics accounts on X and are noteworthy. Anti-eugenicist (talk) 21:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
I don't think we need this drama. This is not meta-wikipedia, for bob's sake. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 22:50, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Christopher (talk) 01:28, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
Internet drama bores me to tears. That kind of unsubstantiated "He might be this person who posted this stuff on that website" does not belong on RW. And we are not here to be used in people's online feuds. Spud (talk) 14:51, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
But we are here to document bad actors. Carthage (talk) 14:54, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
The first person on the internet to suspect that Jordan Lasker was those other accounts is the official RationalWiki Twitter (X) account https://x.com/RationalWiki/status/1790820400361804083 it's odd why RationalWiki staff here are wanting the article deleted because the person who is running the official RW Twitter account has some history debating Jordan Lasker and knows about his nonsense and alternative accounts. If this webpage is deleted there will be no critical coverage of Lasker on the web and he will see this as a great victory. 161.35.165.190 (talk) 16:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
Based on 1) poor quality 2) unproven allegations 3) apparent bad-faith editing (PolyStan/Roggenwolf). Bongolian (talk) 16:50, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
This isn't a delete. There are peer-reviewed papers criticizing Lasker's racist research as containing "severe theoretical, methodological, and rhetorical flaws" as found here [2]. Psychologist Guy (talk) 13:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
There is also a 2-page criticism of one of his papers [3] Psychologist Guy (talk) 13:58, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Please unlock the article! I know of other peer-reviewed research refuting Lasker's 2019 study. 167.71.133.70 (talk) 18:37, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

While I agree the article is garbage, I don't believe the principle of having an article is garbage. I suggest someone quickly goes along, hacks out the pointless/risky crap out of the article [even if it reduces it to a semi-stub] and then leaves it for someone in the future to improve. After all, from what little I know about this person suggests to me is the very sort of person who should be covered by RW, esp as WP don't have anything on him. KarmaPolice (talk) 21:07, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
The article is fine as is. In fact, we should expand it! PolyStan (talk) 21:13, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

If the keep vote wins, I will indeed take a hacksaw to this article. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 21:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
I can't comment on your talk page, but please don't do that either. People should absolutely know that he is a Nazi. And calling his account "Trannyporno" makes it all even more ironic, hahaha. People should also know about his fascist wikipedia propagandizing! PolyStan (talk) 21:35, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
I don't believe @PolyStan is a good faith editor (see their reverted edits on Jonathan Anomaly). They are also adding unsourced, dubious and potentially libellous claims. No evidence offered that Lasker is a "Nazi" same as the very questionable statement on Anomaly's article he is pro-Apartheid. My personal view is this is a troll account making a parody and deliberately adding over-the-top claims to discredit articles. They are also likely a sockpuppet of @Roggenwolf. Anti-eugenicist (talk) 22:04, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Special:Blocklist confirms that PolyStan and Roggenwolf share an IP and are thus the same person. Plutocow (talk) 22:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Not a "garbage" article originally, there was no issue until this article was highjacked by a couple of troll accounts. I suggest reverting to the original version that I wrote [4]. Psychologist Guy (talk) 16:20, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
I think it's worth having an article on people like Lasker, so that people are aware of who they're dealing with if they come into contact with him or see something of his get cited. That said, I would like this article to have more detail on what Lasker actually says, rather than who he's affiliated with (although that stuff is good too). Carthage (talk) 16:34, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
Jordan Lasker is one of the main HBD pseudoscience people with Kirkegaard, Dutton, Curtis Dunkel etc. If you are deleting this article, are you deleting all the others as well? I think not, so it doesn't make sense to delete this. The page is useful for people who come here from Google to see who Lasker is. Without this article there is no collected documentation on any other weblink of the racist nonsense he is part of. 161.35.165.190 (talk) 16:38, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
We can move the section on the evidence suggesting (but not proving) he is the pseudonyms to the talk page. I think talk pages stay up even if mainspace articles are removed. Anti-eugenicist (talk) 16:58, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
Talk pages stay up, yeah, but content on talk pages can get removed under certain circumstances. Carthage (talk) 19:50, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
He's missional, yes the article probs could do with cleanup but deletion is not cleanup. Lavalizard101 (talk) 01:05, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Improve the article, don't delete it. A somebody. (talk) 01:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Changed my vote based on above. Anti-eugenicist (talk) 01:16, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Jesus myth theory | Result: Did the page ever really exist?[edit]

Jesus myth theory – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

So, this article (and the article about the historical evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ) have long been controversial. I don't really want to like tread ground already well covered elsewhere on why these articles are problematic, but I will for the sake of this AfD note that these articles are bloated, hard to read, place too much weight on only a few, let's just say, "controversial" sources, and are just unbalanced in favor of a theory that's ultimately fringe. While these have been expounded on at length before, they're not the principal reason I'm making this AfD. They're secondary. The main reason is that I came across this ancient AfD, and a reason cited in a lot of the "keep" votes is that these articles should be retained in order to be improved upon. It's been three years since that AfD, and this article has remained pretty fucking problematic. I think at this point the articles are too bloated to work on as they currently exist, so it makes more sense to just burn the articles we do have and start fresh. Or, move these articles to essayspace, I suppose. Carthage (talk) 22:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Let's just be honest, the best thing about this verbal diarrhea is the image's headline. It gives extremely undue weight on a very fringe theory. Yes, it's possible that experts are wrong and Jesus never existed, but just try to read this mess. It is terribly written as well. And before someone says "improve instead of deleting it, I'd like to say that we don't have any experts on this subject. I would even say that having an article that is possibly misinformation is much worse than having no article at all. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 22:44, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Unsalvageable from top to bottom. A somebody. (talk) 23:08, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 ^talk 01:42, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Fringe theories don't need articles Pastasauce (talk) 02:06, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Well, not articles promoting them. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 03:02, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Needs to be redone better to have positive rather than negative value, as per above. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 03:02, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
No reason this should exist. Shouldn't this be closed now? Tavantius (talk) 13:13, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Along with all of the other criticisms, this is an extremely dry and boring read once you get to the main body of the article. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 17:41, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Most of the article in its extreme fringe form was written by Dbz a Jesus mythicist who wrote over 90% of the article since 2019 and a series of essays [5]. On his user-page there are unreliable links like this. This is a PRO-fringe article that damages RationalWiki. The statement in the lead "Some academics have accepted the Jesus myth theory" is false. The sources for this statement are "Holding, James P. (2008). Shattering the Christ Myth. Xulon Press." J. P. Holding is hardly a reliable source. The other source is Citizendium to a non-existent article [6]. Much of the sourcing is like this, no academic scholarship. The article should be immediately removed. The deeper concern is why Dbz has been let free to promote his christ myth theory shite on this wiki for 6 years without anyone questioning his edits or checking his sources. Off-site Dbz has been posting on the "Internet Infidels" forum and at Reddit for 3 years and he often links to this RationalWiki article when he debates his opponents but nowhere does he admit he actually wrote it. If this is taken further I would support a topic ban for anything related to Christianity for Dbz. He can't be trusted and is using RationalWiki inappropriately to push a pro-Fringe view. Psychologist Guy (talk) 21:26, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
While I agree that this article should be deleted and has primarily been written by a crank, do you have any evidence that he is using this article to promote his own views outside of rationalwiki? A somebody. (talk) 21:53, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
He links to it on forums [7] . He has over 400 posts on that forum. A scan on RationalWiki shows that nonsensical articles he has written before like Second-god (Christ) were also deleted [8]. The user has had no warnings from anyone about any of this. I disagree with preserving his essays because he is linking to them on other websites. Psychologist Guy (talk) 15:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
@GeeJayK I'm glad you like the image I put on the page and the caption I wrote for it. It was also copied and pasted onto the Jesus page by someone else (in what is probably a highly problematic section). Deleting this article now seems to be the best thing to do. RationalWiki cannot give undue weight to fringe theories that our editors happen to like. Is presenting utter bollocks as if it's the truth damaging to RationalWiki? Of course it bloody is! Spud (talk) 13:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

It might be worth moving to Essayspace. Bongolian (talk) 03:55, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Not opposed to this though I voted under Delete. This happened before with a Dbz article; RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Critics of the historicity of Jesus. The article trio are kind of similar, mainly the work of that editor. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 05:27, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
I also think moving it to essays would be better than outright deleting it. I find the CMT to have some merit to it. Although I disagree with its characterization as a conspiracy theory. Historicizing mythical figures seems to have been a common practice in the ancient world. Herodotus believing Heracles to be a real, historic figure is one example. But the article itself is dense, goes on a lot of tangents, and to be honest, I haven't read every word of it yet. But maybe we should move it instead? LGMR (talk) 19:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
It is a batshit conspiracy theory. A somebody. (talk) 20:00, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
While some people pushing this theory are insane conspiracy theorists, there are also real scholars who take it seriously. IIRC, Richard Carrier originally didn't take it seriously until he got into biblical criticism and realized most biblical scholars are ultra-conservatives who take many things for granted that simply wouldn't be assumed if you were doing any other ancient history. (Not that I endorse Carrier in any way other than as a historian.) LGMR (talk) 07:48, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Just because someone is a scholar does not mean their theories automatically become true or that they are not a batshit insane conspiracy theorist. A somebody. (talk) 14:25, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Where did I say I thought the theory was true? Or that if a scholar says something it becomes true? Why do you keep repeating the word "batshit"? It shouldn't be controversial to question a cult's depiction of its supposed founder. I personally think the character Jesus is a composite of several different historical and legendary figures, which were written into a single person. What does it really matter if there is a single, verifiable historical Jesus or not, since the religion is false? LGMR (talk) 18:24, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Oh I'm talking to a batshit conspiracy theorist, good to know. A somebody. (talk) 18:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
So, do you think the New Testament is historically accurate? LGMR (talk) 18:53, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Don't tar everyone with the same brush A somebody, there may be some plausibility to the theory that Christ may have never existed. Just bc most CMTers are batshit conspiracy theorists doesn't mean they all are, heck the same could be said for anti-flatearthers/"globe-earthers" as the flattato's refer to us (while I have met some "Globies" that believe the push of flat earth is A Russian Disinformation Operation to weaken other countries, doesn't mean all globies are batshit insane. Lavalizard101 (talk) 19:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
For the record, I don't consider myself a CMT, and I think there was a Jewish rebel that inspired the first Christians, but as the cult/religion grew, and the return/end kept getting pushed into the future, Christians started incorporating Greek Cynic-like material and Gnosic theology to make the religion we know today. I don't think these ideas are controversial among modern non-fundie scholars. LGMR (talk) 19:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
If Jesus didn't exist riddle me this, why did non-Christian first century sources mention a Jesus? A somebody. (talk) 19:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
You're going to have to be more specific about which sources you're referring to. The "Testimonium Flavianum" of Josephus is an interpolation. No scholar who isn't a fundie thinks it hasn't been tampered with. Tacitus wrote in the early second century, not the first. I'm done. You've been nothing but hostile. Oh, and Oswald killed Kennedy, we landed on the moon, Al-Qaeda did 9/11 and Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. I'm not some kind of "batshit conspiracy theorist". LGMR (talk) 19:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
The John the Baptist parts hadn't been tampered with, and while scholars reject it's current form, they agree at one point it probably mentioned Jesus without referring to him as The Messiah and a bunch of other things. A somebody. (talk) 20:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Move to essayspace. Plutocow (talk) 19:43, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Move it to essay space. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 19:44, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
I would suggest essay space as well.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 08:03, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
-Flandres (talk) 20:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Agree with Bob M. KarmaPolice (talk) 21:01, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

October 2024[edit]

Grok | Result: It stays for now due to a large round of apathy[edit]

Grok – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Has no sources, is of a term that doesn't really have a clear definition or usage beyond pop culture yet tries to make authoritative statements on subjects beyond that nonetheless, has questionable missionality given that it reads more like essayspace than an actual RW article. Plutocow (talk) 21:58, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

I think the article can be improved without too much work. Some of the films listed on the page might have easily found references. The word has been occasionally used in anthropology for immersion within and deep understanding of a culture.[9] The word can perhaps be compared with the formal debate requirement of correctly restating one's opponent's argument before making a counter-argument. On the opposite end of the spectrum, there's that fascist billionaire's bullshit machine named Grok.[10] Bongolian (talk) 01:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 18:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Xenicibis | Result: Extinct[edit]

Xenicibis – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

This is a stubby article from 2011 on an extinct bird that isn't at all related to RationalWiki's mission. Tavantius (talk) 13:25, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
I wonder if we'll ever get rid of all these bad stubs from "old" RW. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 13:43, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Probably not, GeeJayK. But we have to try. Spud (talk) 13:48, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Why was it added here in the first place? —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 15:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
I cannot see why we have it. I have no problem with it being a stub - as stubs can be expanded. Potentially a dinosaur could be significant - like Archaeopteryx because of its special relevance to creationists and its demonstration of evolution. But I can't any special relevance to this one.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 15:37, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 15:44, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

We have a lot of these kinds of articles around that are mainly EvoWiki ports from way back when. This one doesn't even really talk about evolution so I don't think anyone would miss it but it's something to keep in mind as we comb through these. Plutocow (talk) 00:52, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Reputation management | Result: Bad reputation[edit]

Reputation management – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Poorly written stub The MoR (talk) 17:19, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Bin, fast. Teriyaki12 (talk) 23:29, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Short with little to no substance. Sable! (talk) 18:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Missional, but we would be better served by just starting over. If I was revamping this stub, I would delete the previous wording and replace it entirely. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 18:08, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Hot garbage. Not worth the server space it takes up. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 23:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Agree with Duce. If I was to overhaul this, I'd simply nuke and start again. KarmaPolice (talk) 14:45, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Send this back to draftspace. It's a stub. Needs to be worked on. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 19:57, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

Brandon Tatum | Result: 5-4-2 after 20 days (no consensus)[edit]

Brandon Tatum – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

This is a low-quality listicle created by a drive-by redlink editor who hasn't done anything since 2021. Every single reference is a dead link. I don't argue that the subject might be worth covering, but the article stinks. It has no citations. We'd be better off starting from scratch. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 18:37, 1 October 2024 (UTC) Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 18:37, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Nobody. A somebody. (talk) 18:49, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
I hate meaningless listicles. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 19:44, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
He's sufficiently notable (Candace Owens + Blexit), but all the citations except two are to blather.io, which is defunct. Archive.org captured most of these citations, but failed to do so correctly in a way that the text was saved. Bongolian (talk) 20:07, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
At its current state, the article can't be saved. The subject is missional, but supposing that someone will re-write the article one day, it's better to blow this thing and start over again. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 20:16, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Clearly notable crank. Improve the article, don't scrap it. Carthage (talk) 20:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:33, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
On mission. Obviously better to improve than delete.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 12:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
What Bob and Carthage said. TheOneAndOnlyCirrusMan (talk) 17:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Move to draftspace. Subject is clearly missional and notable, but the problem with the references is too big for it to continue in mainspace for the time being. Plutocow (talk) 21:04, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Second. At this moment in time it's in the shitty position where effectively a) it's a fairly missional topic, b) is a 'decent enough' page but c) doesn't have any refs due to the dead links. KarmaPolice (talk) 10:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

I mean, he's clearly relevant (3.23M YouTube subscribers, 800k Twitter followers, has appeared in PragerU). Only thing preventing me from voting outright keep is that the main reference website doesn't seem to archive well (someone tell me if you can get this to work, because I cannot, at least not on mobile). Plutocow (talk) 20:38, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Voted to move it to draftspace. Plutocow (talk) 21:04, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

JonTron | Result: Keep[edit]

JonTron – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

This whole article covers a single controversy about racist behavior from 2017 and basically nothing since then. JonTron also isn't a political or science YouTuber, so I don't think he's relevant. VerminWiki (talk) 02:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
I don’t think it’s worth keeping. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 19:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Just one incident but it's a pretty major incident, people still try to argue that he said nothing wrong to this day. Though this could probably use an update Plutocow (talk) 02:50, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Missional, and easily meets follower criterion for YouTubers. Bongolian (talk) 03:28, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
If you read the article mentioned under "External links" [11], you'll see that JonTron's bigotry dates back to as early as 2014. So, it is not a "single incident" case. And just because a YouTuber is not science/politically oriented doesn't mean that it is non-missional. Even mainstream children's TV shows could be missional if they inculcate problematic narratives or stereotypes. MayGodSaveUsAll (talk) 06:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 19:55, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Update, improve, don't delete. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 20:05, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
i think trying to update this would be beneficial it was a big incident in fairness, if updating still does not appease people then reconsider.Oneandtwo (talk) 02:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
We aren't PoliticsWiki, ffs! Politics isn't our main mission! I also agree with Cosmik. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 19:49, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
He may not be like a notable figure compared to others on here. But like others said, this wasn’t a one off incident and he still has continued this. I’d say at least there can be some improvements on the article. SomeAutisticAce (talk) 13:09, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Per his continuing to be a far-right psycho promoting conspiracy theories as discussed below. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 19:08, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

He still runs a youtube channel, does anyone know if he's learned to shut his mouth about his racist beliefs? ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 20:04, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't think he's really spoken about it since 2017, but he has publically expressed his belief that the 2020 election was stolen by Joe Biden and that the COVID-19 vaccines are really dangerous in the past few years.(っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 11:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

That's enough of an answer for me, thanks ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 19:07, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Moral hazard | Result: Elimination[edit]

Moral hazard – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Extra tiny, usourced stub about a market failure that Nathan Larson wrote years ago. The way he discribes moral hazard is completely different from any textbook I've ever seen. I just wrote what I consider to be a better version on the free market article, so nothing will be missed. We can redirect to that page too if you guys want. If someone really wants an article about the subject, I can write one article about asymmetric information tomorrow, but I feel like Wikipedia already covers the subject relatively well. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 03:16, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Nathan Larson article. Plutocow (talk) 03:36, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 03:37, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Bongolian (talk) 04:55, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Spud (talk) 15:35, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
The MoR (talk) 16:18, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
No good. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 18:08, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

While you're at it, you might want to look at Rational ignorance, a similar Larson-created stub Plutocow (talk) 05:03, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
@Plutocow As far as I know, this stub seems to be more accurate under the framework of the public choice theory. Nonetheless, I still think we should delete it, not only because it was written by Larson and it is unsourced, but also because it seems to be a very minor public choice concept, Econlib and Investopedia don't even have pages for it. I also checked an introductory book I have on public choice and, at least according to the summary, it appears only twice. Maybe we could use an article about the whole Public choice theory, with its strenghts and limitations, but I'm not going to write it in the near future, so I'd say nuke this page on "rational ignorance". GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 13:13, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Template:Spambot | Result: Filtered out[edit]

Template:Spambot – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Spambots should be given absolutely no recognition, why to we have a ton of these accounts have userpages that are marked by this template? It's really silly and this template, and by extension all the userpages it's plastered on, should be deleted. Plutocow (talk) 07:13, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
Aren't spambot's produce reverted anyway? KarmaPolice (talk) 13:51, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
It's old cruft. It's a long-abandoned practice. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 14:58, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
I think you can just delete those old pages with only this template. Probably no need for a vote. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 14:58, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Does this wiki even have a spambot problem? also per above don't spambot userpages just get deleted, and spambot is listed in the blocking reason? The MoR (talk) 14:03, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
KarmaPolice (talk) 10:26, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

The Progressive Voice | Result: Muted[edit]

The Progressive Voice – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

We've seen this before, it's just another minor YouTube channel that debated with another youtuber some time ago and that's it. I wonder if we'll ever get rid of all these articles. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 05:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC) GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 05:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Seems to have mostly devolved into a hyperpartisan propaganda arm of the Democratic Party. While covering this kind of thing is missional, if we do it should be someone with a bigger reach like Occupy Democrats. The article seems to mostly be just drama; if the Sargon of Akkad stuff is considered relevant it can just be merged into his article. Plutocow (talk) 05:41, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet the criteria. Also, HuffPost writer. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Seems like minor YouTube drama from a while ago, not that noteworthy The MoR (talk) 13:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Agree with Pluto's suggestion. KarmaPolice (talk) 10:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 18:09, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Template:Ben Shapiro/title | Result: DESTROYED using FACTS and LOGIC[edit]

Template:Ben Shapiro/title – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Are we ever going to use this? We have a similar thing for Donald Trump, I know, but this seems unnecessary and it's been left to rot in the unused templates. Plutocow (talk) 06:49, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
This is childish... Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:26, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Dumb Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 18:29, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 19:20, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Dana Ullman/On Wikipedia | Result: Off RationalWiki[edit]

Dana Ullman/On Wikipedia – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Just a copypaste of a few Wikipedia conversations that can easily be linked to instead. The way the information is presented also makes it impossible to tell what I am supposed to be getting from it. Plutocow (talk) 04:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Pretty sure it's against the rules to literally copypaste from the other wiki, when creating an article. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Can't see why it exists.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:08, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 18:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Lee Barnes | Result: People had like a week to defend it and nobody did. Gone.[edit]

Lee Barnes – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

The subject of this article is only described as being an ex-BNP guy who said a mean thing about Britain and writes shitty satire. Not interesting. Almost every link is to this guy's blog, to which he has not posted in almost a full decade. This article is a stub, and I see no hope of it being improved. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 18:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC) Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 18:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Nobody. A somebody. (talk) 18:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Make it go away. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 19:44, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Dylan Wheeler | Result: Deleted… on wheels![edit]

Dylan Wheeler – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

This article was created by a drive-by redlink editor. It is entirely concerned with the subject's Twitter account, which has a paltry 1,439 followers. All of the references are either to Twitter or to a dead website that probably belonged to a blogger. In short, this article was created by somebody who got mad at a Twitter account and typed this terrible stub in response. We don't need this kind of content. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 18:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC) Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 18:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Nobody. A somebody. (talk) 18:49, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
—cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 19:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Suffers from now-defunct blather.io links that were never properly archived. Bongolian (talk) 07:21, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

I'm not sure what happened, but he used to have a huge account on pre-Musk conservative Twitter. It looks like his old @ is being squatted on by a new registration, possibly an impersonator. The Twitter account was what I knew him to be relevant for, don't know if there was anything else. Chillpilled (talk) 20:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
I went by what the article linked to. If the article itself can only show a link to an account with 1500 followers, then it has not justified its own existence. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 13:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Did Melon unban this account? Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 14:03, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Category:Jewish Biblical figures | Result: אויסגעמעקט[edit]

Category:Jewish Biblical figures – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Aside from using "Jewish" as an ethnicity rather than "Israelite" or whatever, doesn't this apply to most biblical characters? I don't see a point to this being a separate category. Plutocow (talk) 09:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 09:55, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:12, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

You don't need an AfD for this, just delete it. Christopher (talk) 10:50, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Template:Abrahamicgods | Result: Godless[edit]

Template:Abrahamicgods – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

What is even the point of this template? No articles actually use it and typing out the template would be more effort than just typing the output. I don't see any use for this Plutocow (talk) 05:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
I can't even tell what the output is supposed to be --Lordofairguitar (talk) 05:56, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:27, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Is this template empty? I think this one could even have be deleted without an AfD. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 14:12, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

WWRD | Result: Got Alzheimer's[edit]

WWRD – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

16 years as a tiny stub! It also reads more like a crappy funspace page, as it makes no attempt to establish that this is a term in actual usage. Not to mention, it feels outdated in the current political climate. Plutocow (talk) 04:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 19:29, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
I get what this is referencing but we have other topical articles for that. Why create another article for the Reagan personality cult based on a term that has no unironic use?-Flandres (talk) 19:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Not worthy of a dedicated article here. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 19:43, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:29, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
The problem is not that it's a stub - good stubs can always be expanded, even if it takes 50 years. The problem is that it is not clear what purpose it serves.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:10, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Comparison of McLean and Aguilard "academic freedom" acts | Result: Overturned[edit]

Comparison of McLean and Aguilard "academic freedom" acts – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Texts to two long-defeated bills. Even if you think the idea isn't bad, the way it's presented makes it unreadable as it's not actually side-by-side. The similarities should be mentioned in the main articles (perhaps by bolding copied sections or similar), as when entire sections have to be crossed out it doesn't make the point look stronger. Plutocow (talk) 04:13, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Candidate for speedy deletion imo. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 13:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
The fuck is this shit? Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 13:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Ah... no. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 19:43, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
-Flandres (talk) 19:44, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Hermit | Result: Left society for good[edit]

Hermit – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

It's been a tiny stub for well over a decade at this point (smaller than even a lot of fork pages) and the article as written isn't particularly good. Plutocow (talk) 04:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
It's short. It's shit. Let's get shot of it. Spud (talk) 04:41, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
I often support improvement over deletion but I don't see the RW relevance angle here.-Flandres (talk) 04:51, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Bongolian (talk) 05:28, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Literally 3 sentences long. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Try our pumpkin spice lasagna!} 13:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

I can see that an article on religious ascetism can be missional, as it involves religious people starving themselves of what they need, be it food or social contact, out of religious piety. And you know, religion is missional. But as this article currently stands, it's shit. Carthage (talk) 04:53, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Should be sent back to draftspace. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 13:45, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
I'm not entirely sure where it could be taken. But there is nothing obviously wrong or offensive about it.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 13:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft:MAGA politicians by state | Result: 10 days with no consensus[edit]

Draft:MAGA politicians by state – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

The creator hasn't really offered a defense as to how this is relevant, so you can look in the talk page for the reasons why this isn't useful. Tl;dr it's just a list with no other information (a purpose that should be fulfilled by categories), there are way too many to reasonably list and it would require constant updating, and splitting them by state isn't really significant to our mission. Plus, having a completely unsourced list of living people isn't really helping us right now. If RationalDude can't provide an explanation of why we should have this, then this just isn't going anywhere and should be deleted. Plutocow (talk) 19:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
A simple list of people with less-than-worthless opinions? Luigifan18 (talk) 19:59, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
Christopher (talk) 20:57, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 15:32, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
At this point in time, the GOP has essentially been taken over by the MAGA cult. Non-fascist Republicans have almost all fled the party. This is most nakedly apparent from when the criminal ex-POTUS tanked the bipartisan immigration bill in Congress at the last minute so that he could try to get re-elected by blaming Democrats on immigration.[12] Bongolian (talk) 05:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

There are waaaay too many MAGA politician for this to ever make sense. I also agree with Plutocow's points. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 20:31, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Every single Republican Politician is a MAGA politician since at least 2019, so having this list is kinda pointless unless you rename it to 'Republican Politicians by State' A somebody. (talk) 01:35, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

I think it could grow into something relevant to RW. For example, actually fleshing out the definition of a 'MAGA politician', noting which of those things each entry ticks, what positions etc they've run for etc. I agree that there should be some form of 'notability' guideline - for example, only allowing entries to be put in if they have a WP or RW page. I think it should be allowed the chance - plus, it's a draft less than 24 hours old. KarmaPolice (talk) 19:53, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
A lot of this could be covered under the Trumpism article. Basically every politician has a Wikipedia page, and if we limit it to those with RW articles that's what categories are for Plutocow (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
No they don't - Federal level, yes. But not state level [or lower]. Plus, if there are criteria that you have to pass to be defined as 'MAGA' [I would personally put it being an active pusher of shit, lies etc - simply echoing others and nodding simply makes you a suckup]. If it was me, I would do it a bit like they did for 'List of creationist scientists' - the colours perhaps representing their current position of power. Anyway, if you don't like lists, you'd better AfD A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism! KarmaPolice (talk) 22:57, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Every single person in the (to pick an arbitrary state) Missouri House of Representatives has a Wikipedia article. That alone is over 100 different Republicans we'd have to parse, not to mention those that retired/were defeated in the last few years and the ones that are entering in the next election (and every election after that). The difference between this and A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism is that at least that article has an explicitly layed out grouping of people to put on the list that doesn't extend indefinitely and at least putting the credentials of those people makes a point about ultracrepidarianism, etc. That list is of people who signed one document, the list of Trump-loving politicians is just going to keep expanding year after year. If we're going to limit it to just those with RW pages, that's what a category is for. And even if none of these problems existed, getting a specific criterea could itself be contentious, supporting Trump could apply to practically all of the Republican party (even those who say they don't tend to agree with him on more policy positions than not). Plutocow (talk) 23:30, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
I did argue that the bar for inclusion should be higher than simply being a spineless suckup. And the argument that 'we'd constantly have to update' could be levelled at any page with a 'live' event or person. KarmaPolice (talk) 00:05, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Personally, I think a quick list of people with breathtakingly awful beliefs who don't deserve even a single vote is missional…Luigifan18 (talk) 18:41, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
At this point, it's just "don't vote for anyone in the Republican Party", not something we need a list for. Plutocow (talk) 23:30, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 19:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
I’m working on it, I have several other drafts I’m also working on. Plus I just posted the defense in the talk page. The list is just for the famous/notable ones, not literally every single maga politician. Rational Dude enter thy lair 21:56, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
How do you determine who's famous/notable? There are people on that page I've never heard of and I tend to pay attention to such things Plutocow (talk) 23:30, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Like KarmaPolice said, based on criteria. Like Mark Robinson and Kristi Noem are infamous for their black nazi and dog shooting controversies respectively, and I decided to add every state because even the lesser known ones should at least be mentioned. Rational Dude enter thy lair 23:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Which criteria? We don't have notability guidelines for a reason, and this isn't something like YouTube where you can slap an arbitrary number on it and call it a day. Having a Wikipedia page is a terrible criterion as I already explained and if having an RW page is it you have to explain what will differentiate that page from a category. Also, please stick with whatever criteria you're going with, you don't need to stretch it to include every state (some states by nature will have smaller/more fringe MAGA movements). Also would love to point out that you don't list Donald Trump despite him being the MAGA politician, oh and you still have absolutely zero references or any content on that page beyond just a list of names. Like what else are you even gonna include? Plutocow (talk) 00:08, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Trump may be the figurehead, but its mostly about his cronies. And like I said before, I'm working on it. I still have a bunch of other drafts to work on. Rational Dude enter thy lair 14:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 00:22, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

I'll switch my vote to end the deadlock if Rational Dude pinkie-promises to me that he can make this project good. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 16:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- I will, I promise and you have my word. We need brain!

^{Give us brain!} 22:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

- - In what way will you make it "good"? I'm skeptical since RD has a history of not really improving their articles that get sent back to draftspace (e.g. Holocene extinction) Plutocow (talk) 03:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
    - I’m still working on that. And I’ll improve this draft by expanding it, adding as many sources and references as possible, and a bit of snark. We need brain! ^{Give us brain!} 19:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
      - That's not exactly convincing. What do you plan on doing to expand the article beyond just adding more and more names? Plutocow (talk) 20:40, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
        What do you think I should do? It’s just a list to catalogue the most well known maga wingnuts by state, with descriptions of course. We need brain! ^{Give us brain!} 22:32, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
      - a) A tiny bio [former/current positions held] and b) what they've done to deserve being on this list - being a MAGA suckup or 'going along with the crowd' isn't enough. One action I think would justify this would be repeated, firm 2020 election allegations. KarmaPolice (talk) 13:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
        I can add that. We need brain! ^{Give us brain!} 00:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

September 2024[edit]

Friedman Unit | Result: Fried to a crisp[edit]

Friedman Unit – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Outdated Bush-era artefact, nobody really uses this anymore, perpetual stub, article doesn't really say anything except "pundits are wrong" (something reiterated across many articles) and if there's anything remotely relevant it can be explained in a single sentence on the Thomas Friedman article. Plutocow (talk) 02:56, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
It's bad. I didn't even know it existed till now. Bongolian (talk) 05:08, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
…Yeah, even I can't defend this one. It's just a fancy way of saying "six months" that makes fun of a particular pundit, which means it can be lumped into the article about said pundit, and… seriously, this is an actual term that people used?! Luigifan18 (talk) 16:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 19:39, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Merge this into the Thomas Friedman article. Luigifan18 (talk) 16:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

Category:Conservapedia users banned from RationalWiki | Result: Banned from RationalWiki[edit]

Category:Conservapedia users banned from RationalWiki – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Besides likely being very incomplete (wasn't EiK a Conservapedia editor?) it serves no purpose but to list four long-term trolls. It's be one thing if it was restricted to the Conservapedia space which is mothballed but no this gets listed on user pages and half of the banned users don't even have pages in that namespace. Why do we have to have a category that makes them special over other recurring trolls like Mikey? It's the same reason we deleted crap like the Kensock template and the list of banned users, so this category should probably follow those into the grave. Plutocow (talk) 00:29, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 04:18, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
I don't see the use of this. We can just mention it in their articles... Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 10:32, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
Who cares about CP anymore? It's a failed wiki which has become a failed group blog which is now a mouldering circlejerk around Schlafly. I pretty much think the only hits they get now are moronic fundies who are too scared to read 'anything done by libruls' but can't follow three-syllable words and folks who come to point/laugh. KarmaPolice (talk) 13:42, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
Post-Conservapedia. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 14:09, 24 September 2024
Also very post-Conservapedia. Spud (talk) 10:51, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

I usually hate everything CP-related, but I actually like this one for historical reasons. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 00:32, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
Like I said with the list of banned users, having a list of banned users who constantly make sockpuppets and how to recognize them would probably be useful for the sysops. Luigifan18 (talk) 00:40, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
And this category does that how? Plutocow (talk) 03:55, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
I suspect the prolific ones all have tells which most old timers [or newish timers who spend too much time at the Bar] can spot with relative ease. It's actually surprisingly difficult to impersonate another person. KarmaPolice (talk) 03:46, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Not everyone is able to "read people" well enough to figure out what those tells are. Luigifan18 (talk) 15:05, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Category:Buried turds | Result: Is now itself buried[edit]

Category:Buried turds – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Pointless category. We can mark shitty essays with {{drive-by}} or {{essaydispute}}, and if an essay is so beyond the pale that those templates would be insufficient then we shouldn't be afraid to delete them. (Don't give me "but the old guard would never delete essays", when judging by my recent cleanup they were much more willing to delete bad essays than we are.) Hell, look at the few pages that are in the category: two of them are talk pages for essays that were already deleted, while the other is one the author put on their own essay. Category:Talk pages for deleted essays is also in this category, which this is kind of redundant to. In general, the procedure of hiding an essay's content in the edit history as this category suggests isn't really much different than deletion save for the fact that it doesn't really solve any problems, and thus we should be able to move past this. Plutocow (talk) 03:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
There's alot of stuff the old guard wouldn't do, because most of them were either shitty centrists or edgy liberals that enjoyed having trolls, fundies and cranks around to "toy with them" in the same way Dawkins speaks about women. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 12:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
This one doesn't make any sense...Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 12:26, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Carthage (talk) 16:40, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Yeah no. A somebody. (talk) 17:19, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
I'm fine with getting rid of this one. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 19:32, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
The purpose of this category existing has long passed. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 15:57, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

If nothing else, this is useful for flagging essays of… questionable quality that need a serious examination of whether or not they're worth keeping (and in some cases, whether or not the authors should be brought to ATIM or the chicken coop; the "Ambition of Truth" horror show quickly comes to mind). Luigifan18 (talk) 16:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
We already have pages for that: Template:Essaydispute, Category:Drive-by essays, RationalWiki:Articles for deletion. All this category does is try to find a convoluted way to keep essays which by all means should be deleted, which is something we've moved passed as a community. Plutocow (talk) 16:23, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Women (sura) | Result: Keep[edit]

Women (sura) – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

We already have RationalWiki:Annotated Qur'an, so this article is redundant. RationalThinker (talk) 13:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Plutocow (talk) 14:47, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
I see that Plutocow didn't even bother explaining their vote this time… Luigifan18 (talk) 16:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Scream!! (talk) 16:30, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 17:30, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 19:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

The Elevated Places | Result: Keep[edit]

The Elevated Places – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

We already have RationalWiki:Annotated Qur'an, so this article is redundant. RationalThinker (talk) 13:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Plutocow (talk) 14:47, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
*sigh* Luigifan18 (talk) 16:16, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Scream!! (talk) 16:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 17:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
It's not well written, but it's worth keeping around. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 19:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

The Family Of Imran | Result: Keep[edit]

The Family Of Imran – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

We already have RationalWiki:Annotated Qur'an, so this article is redundant. RationalThinker (talk) 13:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Plutocow (talk) 14:47, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Luigifan18 (talk) 16:09, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Scream!! (talk) 16:33, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 17:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 19:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

For someone who calls themselfs a "Rationalthinker", I'm not seeing alot of thinking nor rationality behind afd'ing either Quran articles or Fun pages... Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 17:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

The Cow | Result: Not sent to the slaughterhouse[edit]

The Cow – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

We already have RationalWiki:Annotated Qur'an, so this article is redundant. RationalThinker (talk) 13:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Plutocow (talk) 14:46, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 15:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Redundancy isn't always a bad thing, y'know… Luigifan18 (talk) 16:08, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Scream!! (talk) 16:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 19:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

The Ant | Result: Keep[edit]

The Ant – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

We already have RationalWiki:Annotated Qur'an, so this article is redundant. RationalThinker (talk) 13:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

We have plenty of articles on books of the Bible despite our annotated Bible, so I don't see how our coverage of the Quran should be different. Plutocow (talk) 14:45, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Should be expanded on. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 15:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
What Plutocow said. (No, seriously, it's pretty much word for word exactly what I was going to say.) Luigifan18 (talk) 16:00, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Scream!! (talk) 16:33, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 19:36, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Essay:Your ethical obligation to legalise slavery | Result: Speedy delete[edit]

Essay:Your ethical obligation to legalise slavery – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

A rationalwiki essay that supports slavery? Burn it plz Pandemonium (talk) 06:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
I think that user was trying to be satirical, but it doesn’t come off well. There’s also precedent for deleting essays, as Nathan Larson’s pedophilia apologia essays rightfully got nuked and buried. So I’m coming down on the deletion side. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 08:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 12:28, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
What the fuck. Luigifan18 (talk) 12:55, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Power word: Burn. A somebody. (talk) 13:44, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Carthage (talk) 13:46, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Scream!! (talk) 13:57, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Creating this on behalf of User:Pandemonium as they were blocked by the filter. Plutocow (talk) 06:16, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Fun:Bird | Result: Actually does exist (speedy keep)[edit]

Fun:Bird – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

WTF is this article? Seriously, this is the worst fun-namespace article I have ever seeb.It is not funny. It is written is a style that is unacceptable on RationalWiki, even in the fun namespace. I don't know if the person who wrote this is serious or just joking, but it is full of conspiracy, which is against RationalWiki's mission. If taken too seriously, it can be misleading. Therefore I think it should be deleted. RationalThinker (talk) 18:28, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Completely fine, it's an obvious satirical page and is alright for funspace. Worst case scenario, it can be moved to essayspace Plutocow (talk) 18:41, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
I think you completely missed the point; after all the thing’s in fun space. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 18:43, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Funspace delete discussions are an utter waste of time.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 19:25, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Please look up the word "Fun". Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 19:57, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
I like it. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 20:05, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Nothing wrong with it. Scream!! (talk) 20:21, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Hmm... is the OP familiar with the Birds Aren't Real mock conspiracy theory? Just curious. This article is satire based on that. BobJohnson (talk) 20:28, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

It's pretty ironic that this guy complains about a fun page, yet has created 7 fun pages himself. So, he should KNOW what funspace articles are about. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 22:29, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Fun:Breast | Result: Deleted[edit]

Fun:Breast – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

As the article in the center of the recently-deleted template, I'm willing put it up for deletion. I don't find the article offensive, but it clearly reads as an artifact of 2000s-era internet that the world has long moved past. It's not like there's anything great here, I mean the page is mostly a listicle and I know how much y'all love listicles. I'm not a prude and I do think there is potential for a funspace article on this topic, but it'd have to be you know funny which this article is not. It's just outdated, kinda cringy, and most of all bland, and I'm fine with us just moving past this. Plutocow (talk) 03:30, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
If I had tomatoes I'd throw it at this article. Carthage (talk) 03:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
It’s just not funny, and it comes off as more juvenile than anything else. I feel like we’ve outgrown the want to have pages like this as a community. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 12:47, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Truly this is not what RationalWiki is about anymore. I do find it sexst. And surely anyone who wanted a long list of slang synonyms for boob would go to Urban Dictionary. Spud (talk) 14:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
This one's long past it's expiration date. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 15:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Eh, I think this is worth keeping around for how it coyly addresses the subject. Luigifan18 (talk) 03:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Template:Offensive | Result: Speedily deleted[edit]

Template:Offensive – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

This template doesn't do anything but say that one person finds a page "offensive", which doesn't say anything of note given the subjectivity of the term. Actual issues with pages should be addressed, but I don't see how this template is supposed to help. Plutocow (talk) 23:19, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
I do think we should have a content warning template, but this one doesn't fit the bill. Carthage (talk) 23:20, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for starting this. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 23:26, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Pointless. Ioe bidome (talk) 23:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Serves no purpose. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 23:39, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
A somebody. (talk) 01:18, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
I really, really wanted to vote "keep", but… I just can't think of any pages where this would actually be useful. The kind of people who would be offended by RationalWiki are the kind of people whose opinions are less than worthless anyways. Luigifan18 (talk) 02:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

2019 Conservative Party leadership election | Result: Kicked off the ballot[edit]

2019 Conservative Party leadership election – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

It's a semi-stub, doesn't really add much info, is inferior to WP's page, is highly unlikely to be improved, some important aspects covered in 2019 United Kingdom general election and the rest should be in Brexit. KarmaPolice (talk) 12:43, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Agreed. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 13:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
A somebody. (talk) 01:48, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 02:31, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

August 2024[edit]

Andrew Brown | Result: Deleted[edit]

Andrew Brown – (View AfD)

This article has been requested to be deleted before. See here for that discussion.

Delete[edit]

Another shitty stub, the subject has barely any notoriety (there seem to be like ten Andrew Browns that are more notable than him) and the article does a terrible job of establishing missionality besides him making one questionable statement. Plutocow (talk) 21:57, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Burn it. A somebody. (talk) 22:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Not worth keeping. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 02:34, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, make it go away. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 13:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
(っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 13:16, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 13:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
Send it to the hell I don't believe in. Spud (talk) 14:50, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

noting fascism in Europe seems to be on topic to me. The votes above to delete lack any actual reasoning that I can see.Aloysius the Gaul (talk) 01:28, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
How does this article have anything to do with fascism in Europe? Plutocow (talk) 01:53, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
If there's any connection between this particular Andrew Brown and fascism in Europe, the fact that the article says fuck all about it shows how shit it is. Spud (talk) 14:50, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Scientific evidence for God's existence | Result: Keep; funspace duplicate deleted[edit]

Scientific evidence for God's existence – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

As I put in the article itself, this would be more fitting for Funspace, but we already have an equivalent article on there for that, so I see no reason to keep this around. TheOneAndOnlyCirrusMan (talk) 21:48, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

There's a history of Category:Challenge articles such as this, so unless there's a community desire to get rid of them all, this one should be kept. Bongolian (talk) 04:59, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
I like this one, actually. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 06:47, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
(There is a case for deleting the funspace duplicate.)Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 15:32, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Delete the funspace article. That's the duplicate. Spud (talk) 10:58, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Indeed. Assuming that having both articles is indeed a "problem" then funspace should be the one to go.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 13:27, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Now I see why there is a duplicate! Until the 18th of this month the Fun article was: "Arguments for the existence of God". On that day Rational thinker changed it to "Fun:List of scientific evidence for the existence of God". On the same day TheOneAndOnlyCirrusMan opened the AFD on the basis that there were duplicate articles in mainspace and funspace.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 11:18, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Funnily enough, Rational Thinker probably did the right thing. There's no shortage of arguments for the existence of God (but they're all bollocks). Spud (talk) 11:22, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
That's true. There are multiple bad arguments.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 12:16, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 12:30, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Keep please! Teriyaki12 (talk) 07:47, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Support keeping in some form. There is no clear standard as to which of the challenge articles should be in mainspace vs. funspace though, so that is something that can perhaps be sorted out here Plutocow (talk) 08:51, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Statism | Result: Abolished[edit]

Statism – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Just a crappy stub that provides an oversimplified definition of a term (that the article seems to argue with itself over) and nothing else. There's no reason to keep this around. Plutocow (talk) 01:31, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Bongolian (talk) 05:41, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
I'd say redirect to draft, but I have a hard time imagining anyone interested in doing the work, myself included. Carthage (talk) 05:46, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Libertarian garbage. A somebody. (talk) 14:27, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 17:27, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

List of second-generation atheists | Result: Degenerated[edit]

List of second-generation atheists – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

A listicle that only represents irrelevant trivia and not anything missional. Maybe an article on the concept of second generation athiests has a minute chance of being missional but the article as written is just not it. Plutocow (talk) 21:48, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Agreed. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 21:49, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
I would argue it's even less relevant to our mission now, as atheism is no longer the hot-button topic it once was. Carthage (talk) 22:03, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Massively pointless list about something wholly unremarkable.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 06:12, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
ApooftGnegiol (talk) 16:26, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Very America-centric too. By this point, there's going to be load third/fourth gen atheists in places like UK and France. 40% of MPs, for example chose a secular oath when sworn in this year. KarmaPolice (talk) 14:05, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Well, that's sort-of/part-of the problem. But globally, how many generations of people will the be who don't believe in the implied Christian god? Or any god. It is America-centric but it's even more small minded that that.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:34, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Not very useful or noteworthy, even for RW. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 15:18, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Bushisms | Result: 6-1 Redirect[edit]

Bushisms – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Just a bunch of terrible quotes, sometimes for questionable sources. I wouldn't mind sending it to fun space, but I don't think we need this kind of article on the mainspace. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 13:07, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Move to funspace. Carthage (talk) 13:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
I'd say move to Funspace; Either that or make it into a section in the George W Bush article. TheOneAndOnlyCirrusMan (talk) 23:04, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Move to funspace. I've always enjoyed reminiscing with these...-Flandres (talk) 23:09, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
For nostalgia’s sake, move to funspace. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 23:17, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Move to funspace. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 00:37, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Move to funspace. This page is a classic and should be kept. WARNING: NOTED IDIOT Daemonspudguy ^{talk page} 22:00, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

July 2024[edit]

Rotten borough | Result: Redirected to Gerrymander#Gerrymandering vs malapportionment[edit]

Rotten borough – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

1/ WP's version is good (accurate and readable). 2/ It's not missional. 3/ It's not been expanded from a stub despite it existing since 2010. 4/ It's not been touched since 2012. KarmaPolice (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Unchanged stub for 12 years, no citations. Bongolian (talk) 00:08, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
One of many stubs we should vaporise. Oneandtwo (talk) 05:42, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

~~Merge into gerrymander, it's a similar enough concept Plutocow (talk) 00:15, 24 July 2024 (UTC)~~ Never mind, it's already covered on the Gerrymander page, though it still can be a redirect I guess. Plutocow (talk) 23:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I support redirect. KarmaPolice (talk) 23:46, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

Fun:Pwned | Result: Rekt[edit]

Fun:Pwned – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

It's outdated slang, it's linked to in many mainspace pages (so it's not just a funspace issue), even ten years ago nobody wanted this and they were just too lazy to AfD it, and having so many mainspace pages link to this is cringy and lowers the quality of the wiki. Summer1109 (talk) 20:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Not funny. A somebody. (talk) 21:11, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

It's funspace, hence standards are allowed to be lower. It's also probably better than most of the stuff in funspace. Bongolian (talk) 21:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Scream!! (talk) 21:15, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
The 1990s "1337speak" may be quite outdated these days, and even "pwned" is roughly 15 years out of date. But unlike much of funspace, this term at least has a connection to something that became quite mission oriented over time: gaming culture. BobJohnson (talk) 21:23, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Keep! Teriyaki12 (talk) 09:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Goat pwns sheep is eternal. Chillpilled (talk) 14:48, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
—cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 15:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Sounds like someone got pwned by a n00b. Namako (talk) 00:00, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
The person who made this AfD is a buzzkill who is pwned by us all. WARNING: NOTED IDIOT Daemonspudguy ^{talk page} 15:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Has missional relevance and is far from the lamest funspace page we have. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 23:00, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

I have no strong feelings either way on this. KarmaPolice (talk) 11:40, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Appropriate response Carthage (talk) 12:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Get rekt. Carthage (talk) 12:12, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
@Summer1109 You may not be aware that deleting an article does not make all the links to that article disappear. If the article is deleted, all the links will still be there, but they will be red links. Like the link to your user page at the start of this message. In fact, some people would argue that a page should be kept just because a lot of other pages link to it. (But I'm not one of those people.) Spud (talk) 11:23, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
RW needs to get a bot to do the heavy lifting on that one. KarmaPolice (talk) 12:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Enablers | Result: Disabled[edit]

Category:Enablers – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

This is a category that seems to be slapped on a bunch of pages, and it's not very consistent. Fortunately, the category page gives us not one but two seperate definitions: "Enablers are those particularly sketchy woo promoters and other assorted scam-artists who are known to hang out with and seek influence on celebrities and politicians (i.e., those who have power, as opposed to no-account schlubs with more money than good sense) and whose very presence seems to encourage further fuckups." Okay, but this seems like a narrow definition and doesn't apply to most of the people in the category, as many are themselves powerful people like politicians, celebrities, and CEOs and more often than not are primarily known for sketchy politics rather than woo. But wait, we have another definition! "More generally, an enabler is someone who encourages negative behavior in another." Okay, but that can apply to almost everyone we have an article on? Generally, if we have an article on them they're typically promoting something sketchy, which falls into this category under this definition but is nowhere near consistently applied. We either have a category that's overbroad or weirdly narrow and confusingly named, the category is poorly defined in either case, and overall it just reads like an assorted list of people we don't like with no other coherence to it. We'd probably be doing ourselves a favor by just getting rid of this category. Plutocow (talk) 00:28, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
I've used it, but I have to agree that it's problematic. I think the main problem is that it's a vague concept. Bongolian (talk) 02:12, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
I think the way it's used is so vague and broad it's not useful. It's not a category useful for looking anything up. Better to start over if people have ideas for more well-defined categories. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 17:31, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, I don’t think I’ve ever used this one. I don’t get it at all, and it’s very vague. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 18:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
A somebody. (talk) 20:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Not only too vague, but also subjective. I prefer categories which are reasonably objective in nature. KarmaPolice (talk) 17:17, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Maybe change it to "instigators"? Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:52, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
You could start over with a new category which is more strictly defined. I think "Instigators" may also be too subjective, very broad and likely to end up containing every person who inspired anything RW editors dislike. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 17:29, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

Keep in mind we can have Inferno Bot remove this category from all its pages if necessary, so "but it'll take a lot of work to remove this category" isn't a valid reason to vote keep. Plutocow (talk) 00:31, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Fun:National Atheist Party | Result: Lost in a landslide[edit]

Fun:National Atheist Party – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

This was supposed to be the fun counterpart to a mainspace article that was deleted in an an earlier AfD, so I'm not sure what the point is of keeping it around. This isn't particularly funny either, consisting of "jokes" that have simply been long overplayed at this point, so it's not really worth saving. Plutocow (talk) 04:14, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Yeah. It's a load of shit. Spud (talk) 07:33, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
No point. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 10:26, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Is there any article in fun space that is actually funny? A somebody. (talk) 13:49, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 11:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

June 2024[edit]

John Mackay | Result: Redirected to newly-created Creation Research article; other stubs deleted[edit]

John Mackay – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

This seems to be a relic of an older time on the wiki when we thought we needed articles on every single creationist, no matter how stubby. Tempted to delete it outright, but I figured someone might know a place to merge or redirect it to. This is also an AfD for Jonathan Witt and Robert E. D. Clark, which have similar problems. Plutocow (talk) 21:53, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
I agree; this one's not really needed. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 22:12, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 22:36, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
11-year stub. Doesn't need a vote to delete in my opinion. Bongolian (talk) 03:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Every creationist article should explain why we have an article on them, are they important in either politics or the creationist spheres? If not, burn it. A somebody. (talk) 03:29, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Is still active. Is still a creationist. Does not have a WP page. Nor does Creation Research.net [the org he works with]. If this isn't what RW is for, what the hell is it? Needs development, not binning. And if you want to AfD the other two, open separate cases for them, not a paperclipping of them onto this one. KarmaPolice (talk) 00:52, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
I just spun up a draft for Creation Research. I am surprised they didn’t have an article here. I’d support merging the Mackay article into the draft. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 17:54, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
The only reason I'm seeing for deletion here is that people are too lazy to put the work into developing it. Carthage (talk) 17:35, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

While IMHO this stub isn't worth saving (some statements seem unsourced and wrong), Mackay seems to be a reasonably big figure in the international creationist scene (which is quite smaller than the US scene but still), and has strong links to Answers in Genesis, Ken Ham, and the Institute for Creation Research. If there's anything of value in this stub, put it in the Creation Research draft; this sort of thing should be RW's "bread and butter", and I agree that lazy AfDs aren't the answer here. ^{— Unsigned, by: BobJohnson / talk / contribs}
-I agree with Johnson.-Flandres (talk) 22:07, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

As far as the other stubs go:

A) I don't think Robert E.D. Clark is notable on his own, but per this link he was a council member of the Victoria Institute, which RW does not have an article on. While Clark was in the organization during a time period where it wasn't as relevant anymore, the Victoria Institute is one of the earliest anti-evolution organizations and seems to provide (at first glance) a fascinating link between the relationship between science and religion in the 19th century, particularly in England. (The Victoria Institute wasn't anything as stridently anti-evolution as young earth creationism; I gather that Darwin's theories were for some reason not seen as harmonious with the old Baconian method of science that members adhered to; they were also against Biblical criticism for the same reasons). So I'd say delete the stub, but maybe look into the Victoria Institute whenever one has time to look into historical anti-evolution obscura.

B) We already have an article on the Discovery Institute and I don't see much evidence that Jonathan Witt is notable beyond that. BobJohnson (talk) 23:10, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Fun:Aliens are biscuits | Result: Deleted[edit]

Fun:Aliens are biscuits – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Absolute fucking shit. Videos of ISIS beheadings are funnier than this article. 208.87.240.35 (talk) 21:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
I don't see how anyone would find this funny... KarmaPolice (talk) 15:21, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Things in funspace should be funny, this isn't. A somebody. (talk) 19:43, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Not funny in the slightest to me lets NUKE! EditorialMaster (talk) 22:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Axe it. LeGrandePumbloom _{Peace, Land, and Nuclear Annihilation} 14:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

It's stupid but harmless. Carthage (talk) 15:26, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Who said funspace articles have to be funny? Harmless. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 23:39, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Preserved here, because it was deemed "interesting to look at and possibly even read". --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 23:17, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Shahid | Result: Had a fatwa declared against it[edit]

Shahid – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

It contains significant factual inaccuracies and misinterpretations about "shaheed" and "Shi'a," spreads misconceptions about Islamic beliefs, and covers a subject that is niche and irrelevant. It needs a full rewrite at least. — Jweaker 16:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 16:54, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Also a long-term stub. Bongolian (talk) 18:15, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
This article has 'forever stuck in the late 2000s' energy, so burn it. A somebody. (talk) 18:16, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Outdated and poorly written , not sure anyone is that interested in rewriting it , my vote would go to deleting. EditorialMaster (talk) 13:19, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 23:08, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
7-0 after three days, I don't think we need to hold onto this for any longer. Plutocow (talk) 23:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Age of consent | Result: Died of old age[edit]

Age of consent – (View AfD)

This article has been requested to be deleted before. See here for that discussion.

Delete[edit]

Another really problematic article in this topic area. This article was missed in the previous purges because it wasn't edited by Larson's main accounts of Tisane, Landmartian, or L's Ideology but it was edited by the extremely dubious Men's Rights EXTREMIST and Applesauce and it shows. One major section of the article was just removed, and the "History" section is also hanging by a thread due to problematic sourcing, and if you remove that you're left with a stub that doesn't remotely do the topic justice. Another one we'll have to TNT, but it's better than having borderline pedo apologist shit. Plutocow (talk) 05:31, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
I don't know how this article survived so long without being noticed, but we should burn it and get rid of the ashes. A somebody. (talk) 14:19, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
The article, as currently presented, has lots of problems. Removing is in our best interest now. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 14:47, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
I would agree, too problematic at this point. BobJohnson (talk) 16:28, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Red herrings in Holocaust denial | Result: Refuted and counter-denied[edit]

Red herrings in Holocaust denial – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Most of these points are already covered in either the Holocaust denial page or Holocaust profit controversy. The custom "sources needed" template isn't a great sign, as it kind of reads like "here's some text too shitty and unsourced for our gold-level article", but given that the points are still covered under that article anyway it seems that this article is mostly just redundant nowadays. Plutocow (talk) 08:37, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Largely duplicative material. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 13:04, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Redundant material. KarmaPolice (talk) 20:56, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete - Not needed here.1357User (talk) 13:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete - denail coverage on Holocaust page covers it. Aloysius the Gaul (talk) 22:48, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Unsalvageable. A somebody. (talk) 16:36, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Let's merge it into the holocaust denial article. ←§ Reichtangle (talk) 12:03, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
What is there to merge? Christopher (talk) 14:20, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Merge if there's anything missing. Bongolian (talk) 01:11, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
If there's any content on this page that isn't duplicated from the Holocaust denial page, then take that content and merge it with said page. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 23:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

May 2024[edit]

Fun:Fisher Price | Result: Skunked[edit]

Fun:Fisher Price – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Another stubby, pointless, and unfunny page polluting funspace. I was tempted to just delete the page outright, but apparently it was created a few years ago by @Rockford the Roe so I'll give him a chance to defend his work of "comedy". Plutocow (talk) 20:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
There must be some inside joke here, but I can't fathom what it is. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 21:01, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Calling this a stub is an insult to stubs. At least most stubs make a vague attempt of being 'useful'. KarmaPolice (talk) 21:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Childish. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 21:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Bongolian (talk) 01:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 03:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

I don't think this required a vote: funspace + stub + not funny. Just delete it. Bongolian (talk) 06:53, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Fun:GAIDS | Result: Sashayed away[edit]

Fun:GAIDS – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Not funny and pointless 2600:1002:B0EB:E3BC:9513:77D3:F711:66C1 (talk) 22:05, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
dlete - it's just bullshit. Aloysius the Gaul (talk) 21:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
No idea how this article survived for this long, burn it and bury the ashes. A somebody. (talk) 22:26, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Worn-out homophobic jokes that are musty, crusty, and dusty on MY RationalWiki? No thank you! Relegate this one to the rubbish bin. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 23:43, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
You can find funnier shit reading Reuters. Carthage (talk) 23:53, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Fun:Pro-Hamas bingo | Result: Terrorised[edit]

Fun:Pro-Hamas bingo – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Strawmen abound here. Furthermore, why must we continue to frivolously denounce Hamas? October 7th was awful, but it is not an excuse for Israel's crimes against humanity. Hamas isn't the one currently conducting a genocide, Israel is. The existence of this bingo card also opens up an "Israeli apologist bingo," and I don't know if the wiki is ready for that. Carthage (talk) 17:48, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Stupid bullshit. Makes me wonder if the creator is Pro-Israel? Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 19:31, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

It is definitely a strawman. But so are, among others, Fun:GOP Rhetoric Bingo, Fun:Nationalist bingo, Fun:Pro-life argument bingo and Fun:Conservative argument bingo. Maybe we should question this whole form of "humor" and send them all to essay space. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 17:58, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Do you really want a bingo card that equivocates on genocide and invites the potential for needless drama (as already being seen)? Carthage (talk) 18:01, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure I want any bingo card, actually, my point was discussing the whole usefulness of this whole thing. I'll probably end up voting for deletion, but I'd like to see what others have to say about other bad bingo cards we have and if we should delete them as well, or move them to the essay space. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 18:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

UCADIA | Result: Keep[edit]

UCADIA – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Random woomeister website of which sources are all primary and dead. Appears to have no significance or notability. Lavalizard101 (talk) 11:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
And yes I know I could just delete it myself as a sysop but I would prefer an AFD as it has been here for years and I don't like unilaterally deleting a page that has been here for so long. Lavalizard101 (talk)
Some links are really dead, some seem to have temporary error. I've inserted archive links for the list of external links. It seems the early websites were partially replaced with new ones later, the text being dated. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 13:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
I had a look to see if i could contribute to the page and i seen the AFD and decided i agree with @Lavalizard101 on this , also as a Sysop who brings to note his thoughts rather than acting immediately and deleting shows very good faith to me , thank you Lava. David D (talk) 16:43, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
I've done some more work on it, and I think it's salvageable. I agree it's been very rough, but it's also been easy to find a few refs for improving it. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 18:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Burn it. A somebody. (talk) 01:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Set fire to it :) DecemberRebmeced (talk) 08:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Exactly the kind of thing where RationalWiki can fill a gap by documenting non-notable organizations that have been compared to cults. It's not gone, it's not just websites (the description is sloppy), but there's a series of organizations. "Ucadia Foundation" (ucadia.org) describes it in various terms, but very vaguely. There's apparently various Ucadia societies worldwide with a number of registered members, they seem to have their own cryptocurrency, and their own products for members, and more. An archived older version has it that "As of SOL E1:Y4:A35:S3:M9:D5 [13th of June 2016] Ucadia became a confidential organisation with the myriad of satellite sites that once made-up the open source Ucadia network being taken down." --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 14:05, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
-Flandres (talk) 19:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep and improve organization pages is my point of view. Elf (talk) 10:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Second Apooft's argument. The page needs expansion/improvement/updating, not being memory-holed. WP does not have a page, so it is on us to provide the commentary. This is exactly what RW is for! KarmaPolice (talk) 11:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Needs expansion and more analysis, but is worth keeping around. It is certainly a missionable topic. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 20:45, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Per Apooft's suggestion. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 04:51, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
On principle it is better to improve or update on-mission articles then it is to delete them. In addition, our priority has historically been to prioritize missionality over notability (within reason). Edit. Finally, RW has no prohibition on the use of primary sources.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 05:31, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Sure we can all try to fill the gaps and improve this, keep for now. Intelligentguy (talk) 09:03, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

National Atheist Party | Result: Defunct[edit]

National Atheist Party – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Facebook group turned "Political Party" turned Facebook group. A somebody. (talk) 01:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
The founder should have presented evidence that it's more than one person. Bongolian (talk) 02:26, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Wasn't even relevant enough to remain an actual political party, much less to meet RW's notability guidelines. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 04:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
There doesn't seem to be any evidence it's actually a thing. Most of the links don't work for me.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Broken links and a party that probably never existed ←§ Reichtangle (talk) 17:12, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Demolish this - speedy Qwepoi (talk) 11:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Why are there so many stubs from the early 2010's and late 2000's ←§ Reichtangle (talk) 17:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Traditional values | Result: Merged with and redirected to Appeal to tradition[edit]

Traditional values – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Just a collection of bullet points and unfunny snark with very little context and no references. Derivative of Good old days and Family values. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 16:19, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Our page on Tradition is summoning most of this page aswell. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 17:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Supremely unfunny and I have no idea why a defunct New Zealand environmentalist party is in the article. A somebody. (talk) 20:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Not remotely funny , lacks reference also , bin. Teriyaki12 (talk) 13:40, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Delete this article , lacks any relevance.DecemberRebmeced (talk) 12:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

There probably is a line to be drawn between "traditional values" and "family values", though I'm not sure if conservatives who abuse the terms would bother. In any case, yeah, this page could use some more improvements. Luigifan18 (talk) 21:36, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
I like it. I want to keep it. It’s rationale. New world (talk) 20:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Merge with Appeal to tradition, put in redirect. The latter could do with some work too. But as usual with me, the original page must remain until this is done right. So consider this in a straight Delete/Keep fight as a vote for Keep [for now]. KarmaPolice (talk) 17:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
I second the motion to merge and redirect. It does seem to me like there are certain parts of this article could be salvaged, if properly cleaned up with some spit and polish. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 20:45, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Merge with tradition Ioe bidome (talk) 23:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Merge and redirect to Appeal to Tradition. FriendlySocDem (talk) 01:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Merge with tradition sounds good to me RTD (talk) 11:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
I agree with KarmaPolice.-Flandres (talk) 19:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

I've removed the snark that was added today, unfortunately quality edits added alongside the snark were removed. Ioe bidome (talk) 21:36, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Votes are 5-2-5, with 7 in favor of keeping the content in some form, so it's not a consensus in favor of deletion. Plutocow (talk) 18:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
'Change must have a majority vote' - those five merge/redirects are a de facto vote for 'keep for now', so I would say the motion fails. And as it's been open over a month, time to pull the plug? KarmaPolice (talk) 18:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Perhaps, though you could also argue that the merge option succeeds as the middle ground, as there are 7 votes for the content existing in some form but 10 against it staying in its current form. Plutocow (talk) 18:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
We're kinda stuck until somebody makes a decent attempt to merge it into 'appeal to tradition'. KarmaPolice (talk) 19:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Veterans Party of America | Result: Keep[edit]

Veterans Party of America – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

An utterly irrelevant third party that went bust sometime after 2019, and got less votes than the fucking Legal Marijuana Now Party A somebody. (talk) 23:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
If we had a page for political parties of the United States, then we could merge some of the more relevant parts of this article with that. Given that we have no such article, however, it's probably better off being deleted. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 01:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
No longer in operation , delete. Intelligentguy (talk) 13:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Pointless article , unless we want to open a can of worms for an article on political parties US. Delete Bookability (talk) 13:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
~~Not worth preserving. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 15:39, 8 May 2024 (UTC)~~
Agree with Cosmikedebris , not worth preservation , incinerate! Leparis (talk) 23:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Does not have a WP page - it got AfD'd in 2019. We are all that is left. While not strictly missional, I do think it should remain as a record for history and is something to help RW raise it's profile with the Big Public [for every time someone views us for this page, they might look at others]. Perhaps someone could simply reduce it to a past-tense semi-stub, ready for the time a big 'US political parties' page is made, as suggested by Postuhenin? [I have visions of perhaps a huge political compass with all the minor/defunct parties plotted on it]. KarmaPolice (talk) 14:27, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Support keeping for archival purposes. Carthage (talk) 02:54, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
While the page does not exist on Wikipedia, it is still worth it to keep here because the article itself was nicely written so far with enough sources. Contractor (talk) 03:22, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
All but one of the links has died. And how could we prove that the stuff we quoted from them isn't just made up to make them look bad? A somebody. (talk) 18:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Did you even bother to check the internet archive? I didn't think so. I updated the page to show preserved snapshots of the dead links. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 19:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Pretty sure this is a violation of the interaction ban. (Oh wait, nvm I'm an idiot. I misread.) Carthage (talk) 00:20, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
—cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 19:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Same reason as KarmaPolice, Carthage, and Contractor. Luigifan18 (talk) 19:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Nicely written article i may research and contribute more if the AFD decides to keep the article. David D (talk) 16:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Agree with KP's suggestion and am changing my vote accordingly. Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 21:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- EllyPo (talk) 09:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

College Conspiracy | Result: Flunked out[edit]

College Conspiracy – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

This article is shit even after nearly a decade.This article is about an irrelevant youtube video that was watched by only 50, 000 people Reichtangle (talk) 11:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Christopher (talk) 17:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
—cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 17:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Why do we have an article on this? it has 50,000 views and nobody seems to care about this guy if his the view count of a couple dozen people on his latest videos are to be believed. A somebody. (talk) 22:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
I have no belief that this page is either remotely important or capable of being improved. KarmaPolice (talk) 14:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Garbage. Shanghai1 (talk) 23:55, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
No citations, 1 YouTube video from ages ago. Bongolian (talk) 06:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Delete , 0 citations and no importance to anyone. EllyPo (talk) 08:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Well, it's missional in the sense that it exposes a bullshit screed as being, well, bullshit. Old woo is still woo. Luigifan18 (talk) 00:10, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

This article was nominated before, with only one vote for delete. I do wonder why this place has become so much more willing to delete articles recently. Christopher (talk) 17:46, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
The community and standards of RationalWiki have changed. A somebody. (talk) 22:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
No wonder there are so many stubs from the Late 2000's and early 2010's ←§ Reichtangle (talk) 02:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
I suspect some of the folks might have been willing to see if this page/creator would develop into something bigger. It has not [this is a position where the lack of any 'pagehit counter' hinders us, because we have no idea if this page gets much traffic. KarmaPolice (talk) 14:30, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Balanced Budget Amendment | Result: Tilted[edit]

Balanced Budget Amendment – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

I think this article is beyond redemption. It has only three sources, all of them are dead, and IMO that’s enough for a deletion (as I said before, IMO unsourced articles articles should be killed on sight). But the content of the article is also grossly inaccurate. First, it presents expenditure ceilings as a fringe idea. Nothing closer from the truth. According to the IMF, dozens of countries have this sort of fiscal frameworks,[13] and they seem to work just fine. If anything, the American debt ceiling is uncommon (IIRC it only exists in Denmark. But that’s not even the main problem of the article.

Graph representing the liquidity trap on a IS-LM model.
According to the author, a balance budget amendment would strip the government from the tools that are needed to fight recessions. That’s not true for many reasons. I believe that most economists today see monetary policy as a more efficient way to counter economic cycles than fiscal policy, but let’s suppose now that the US is in a liquidity trap, a situation where fiscal policy works very well (though many see it as another Laffer Curve, a theoretical curiosity with no empirical validation). Most, if not all the countries that adopt this kind of fiscal rule admit exceptions for recessions, as well as natural catastrophes and emergencies. I’m not 100% sure, but I think back then, during the Great Recession, many countries with expenditure ceilings didn’t have, in fact rules for exceptions for their ceillings. But this was fixed, as we could see in the pandemic, where countries spend a lot. Now, do I support this amendment? I’m inclined to say no because I prefer synthetic constitutions with abstract rules. But this article, despite being just a stub, is just too bad for main space. And why don’t you fix it then, Gee? Because I don’t have time, and quite frankly, I don’t think we need an article on the subject, so even if the article was a little bit better, I'd still support deleting it. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 02:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't see how the article, as presently written, is anywhere close to being missional. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 17:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Too stubby ←§ Reichtangle (talk) 17:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
It is a bit of mess this article , inaccurate it appears also. Delete Qwepoi (talk) 03:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
I did have a look over this article to try and add some value but i think it is a total minefield, get rid. Edit0r (talk) 03:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

I won't pretend to know anything about the subject in question, but what would the material costs of a "balanced budget amendment" be? Like, what programs would be slashed if such a budget was passed, if any? Given that there is a tendency for "fiscal responsibility" measures to target programs that benefit the working class or are detrimental to the interests of plutocracy, I think my question is a reasonable one, unless I'm totally off the mark. Carthage (talk) 03:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

April 2024[edit]

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

Fun:Barry Bonds – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

What is the point of this 50.29.218.72 (talk) 21:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
good question BON ^{— Unsigned, by: Scream!! / talk / contribs} 22:10, 19 April 2024‎
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: Sold by the seashore[edit]

Shelly the Republican – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Another decade old article about a random-ass blog no one gives a shit about. Carthage (talk) 22:33, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
The incinerations will continue until morale improves. A somebody. (talk) 19:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Suspect nothing shall be lost if this page suddently vanished. KarmaPolice (talk) 20:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
Delete , boring EditorialMaster (talk) 12:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 16:26, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Weird article. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 12:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
The subject isn't worthy of an article. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 15:13, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
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?

—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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

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)
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)
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)
Keep Revolverman (talk) 21:30, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 17:39, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 02:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Bongolian (talk) 07:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Move to the essay space. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 14:24, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Sure. Justarandomliberal (talk) 14:28, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
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)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 15:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
If delete fails I would be OK with essay too.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 17:48, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
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)
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)
GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 19:57, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Delete , old videos , few subscribers , does not add anything to Ratwikis sites and missions.Oneandtwo (talk) 18:32, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Dead channel, wasn’t interesting in the first place. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 20:12, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
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)
I think this is undue attention for someone with 44,911 total views. Justarandomliberal (talk) 23:54, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

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)
Seconded. Carthage (talk) 17:15, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 00:35, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
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)
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)
Is of historical significance, at least. Plutocow (talk) 19:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Ioe bidome (talk) 23:46, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep Revolverman (talk) 20:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

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 with and redirected to Donald Trump[edit]

Presidential candidacy of Donald Trump – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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]

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)
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]

Merge with the appropriate section(s) in Donald Trump. --Goatspeed. _{Stalk me}🎄CircularR asoning🎄^{See my experiments} 23:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Merge. Bongolian (talk) 05:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
Merge thrice. Patty Pat 13:57, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
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)
As per KP. Bongolian (talk) 03:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Merge into main article on the big orange baby. Spud (talk) 14:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 23:52, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Merge RTD (talk) 03:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
(っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 17:48, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 17:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
(っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 17:14, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
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)
Pointless. Plutocow (talk) 19:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
The current presentation isn't very useful and looks like an old news blurb. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 22:16, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
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)
- Rairyu75 (Talk) 19:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Weirdly constructed. Bongolian (talk) 21:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
TNT. Justarandomliberal (talk) 21:52, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Judging from his Wikipedia page, 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. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 17:15, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

High-speed rail | Result: Keep[edit]

High-speed rail – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 14:21, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

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)
Carthage (talk) 14:22, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 15:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
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)
Bongolian (talk) 06:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
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)
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)
A common theme of political clout and part of some conspiracies. Lavalizard101 (talk) 11:35, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 15:40, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep Revolverman (talk) 21:00, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

Send it to the essay space. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 14:23, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
I am also fine with sending it to the essay space. Same with High Speed 2. Justarandomliberal (talk) 14:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
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)
If delete fails I would be OK with essay too.Bob ^{"Life is short and (insert adjective)"} 17:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Into rail transportation! - Rairyu75 (Talk) 23:33, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

March 2024[edit]

Gaysdidit | Result: Merged[edit]

Gaysdidit – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
Not a real article 63.115.31.130 (talk) 19:58, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

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)
Merge it. Patty Pat 12:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Third. KarmaPolice (talk) 18:44, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
(っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
As the person who originally suggested merging Ioe bidome (talk) 20:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, this doesn't need to be its own page. Merge it. Luigifan18 (talk) 00:09, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Merge. Bongolian (talk) 01:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Merge - best merged do not think it should be it's own page Oneandtwo (talk) 18:30, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Merge - Merge this EditorialMaster (talk) 04:43, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

~~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]

Redirect to draft based off Natsuki's response. Carthage (talk) 11:56, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Sure, I take this one back. Draft it. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 23:28, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 00:36, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Only missional for people's reaction to her boobs, which will soon be forgotten. Bongolian (talk) 20:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Remembering a person in this context is pretty awful, honestly. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 20:34, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
No, Bob, No. We can't stoop this low. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 20:44, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Nothing against the author, but if I want big boobs, I know where to find them. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 20:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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]

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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
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]

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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
(っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 19:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
BobJohnson (talk) 19:56, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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]

Deletion attempt is an attempt at whitewashing the person. Nominator is not here in good faith. Lavalizard101 (talk) 13:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 13:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Carthage (talk) 13:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
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)
I suggest keep , i agree the user having this as there only contribution smells BerlinEditor (talk) 16:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
The originator of this request is obviously ignorant of RationalWiki's purpose. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 17:07, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
This version is inferior to the one on the amino acid page. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 ^talk 00:01, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Vaporize it. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 00:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
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)
This isn't Wikipedia. Carthage (talk) 00:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

C0nc0rdance | Result: Discordant[edit]

C0nc0rdance – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
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)
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)
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)
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]

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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 18:37, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
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)
Insignificant. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 ^talk 18:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
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)
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)
(っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 11:11, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Speedy delete for me, boring. DecemberRebmeced (talk) 02:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

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)
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]

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

Goat[edit]

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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

We have Category:Lists, I don't see how this category is supposed to be different. Plutocow (talk) 20:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Seems redundant and unnecessary. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 22:55, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 02:48, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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]

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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
I suppose it's nothing too exceptional. Chillpilled (talk) 06:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
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)
Nothing of value will be lost if this one is consigned to the bit bucket. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 19:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet the 100k criteria. Also dead channel. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 23:59, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
In accordance with site standards. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 ^talk 01:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

Just yet another stub written over a decade about about another dead, obscure site. We've seen this dozens of times. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 21:47, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
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. _{See what I'm up to}🎄CircularR asoning🎄^{See my experiments} 23:57, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

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. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 13:31, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
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)
Carthage (talk) 13:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
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, [14] 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,[15] 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)

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

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

Demand side economics – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 21:51, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Poorly sourced stub. I support deletion and revisiting the topic in a future article. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 22:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
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)
Melt in fluoroantimonic acid --Goatspeed. _{Stalk me}🎄CircularR asoning🎄^{See what I've been messing around with} 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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

More low-effort garbage, it can go too. Plutocow (talk) 04:02, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Chillpilled (talk) 04:25, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
—cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 04:31, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Five words and an emoji does not a funspace article make. Spud (talk) 06:00, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Sincerely, Postuhenin the neurodivergent doodlebug! (say hi! ^^) 20:37, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
(っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 20:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Not funny and just plain stupid, hopelessly tiny stub. --Goatspeed. _{Happy Holidays!}🎄CircularR asoning🎄^{See what I've been messing around with} 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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
Garbo Chillpilled (talk) 04:23, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Might have been funny once. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 04:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
- Rairyu75 (Talk) 05:11, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
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]

Anti-Oedipus – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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]

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)
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)
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)
--Goatspeed. _{Stalk me}🎄CircularR asoning🎄^{See what I've been messing around with} 13:31, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

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:

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.
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)
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.
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.
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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
Kill it with fire --Goatspeed. _{Happy Holidays!}🎄CircularR asoning🎄^{See my experiments} 15:50, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
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)
Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 17:22, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
ApooftGnegiol (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
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)
- I deserve kudos for having exposed a nutty echochamber.Critical Rationalist (talk)!
Lacks notability. Bongolian (talk) 18:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
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]

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 [16] 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)

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. GeeJayK ^{Where 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 [17].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]

This whole fucking thing is phenomenally stupid. Carthage (talk) 16:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
It's like watching 2 kids fighting over a toy... Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 16:19, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
This is the sort of moment that makes me glad for not being a moderator anymore. GeeJayK ^{Where 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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

This guy only has 28.8K followers on YouTube,[18] well-below our minimum of 100K (RationalWiki:Community Standards#Notability). Bongolian (talk) 18:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Candidate for speedy deletion. There's no need to give this assclown any oxygen. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 19:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Even if this guy was bigger, the stub doesn't even challenge his ideas. GeeJayK ^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 19:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
Carthage (talk) 00:40, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
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)
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 – (View AfD)

Delete[edit]

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)
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)

RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Archive 2024

December 2024[edit]

Christ myth theory | Result: Myth busted[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Essay:Andrew Schlafly--psychopathology | Result: Sent to the loony bin[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Fun:Andrew Schlafly/MSA | Result: Yeeted into the sun[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Phenomenon | Result: Canceled after one season[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Religious moderacy | Result: Hijacked by extremists[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

November 2024[edit]

Fun:List of animals killed by humans | Result: Killed by humans[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Jordan Lasker | Result: Keep[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Jesus myth theory | Result: Did the page ever really exist?[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

October 2024[edit]

Grok | Result: It stays for now due to a large round of apathy[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Xenicibis | Result: Extinct[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Reputation management | Result: Bad reputation[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Brandon Tatum | Result: 5-4-2 after 20 days (no consensus)[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

JonTron | Result: Keep[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Moral hazard | Result: Elimination[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

Template:Spambot | Result: Filtered out[edit]

Delete[edit]

Keep[edit]

Merge/redirect[edit]

Goat[edit]

The Progressive Voice | Result: Muted[edit]