RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/C0nc0rdance

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

C0nc0rdance | Result: Discordant[edit]

C0nc0rdance (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete[edit]

  1. 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)
  2. 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)
  3. 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)
  4. 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)
  5. 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]

  1. 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]