RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/CosmicSkeptic

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

CosmicSkeptic | Result: Deleted[edit]

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


  1. if we remove all the claims that are nonsense and unsupported, there is nothing left of the article and no reason to have oneAMassiveGay (talk) 20:19, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  2. Always happy to delete a Youtuber article. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 20:25, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  3. Might be worth it to propose a purge of the overwhelming majority of our youtube personality articles-Hastur! (talk) 20:27, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  4. Irrelevant internet personalities don't require a presence here unless they're notable in some other fashion. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / Pencil.png / Tux icon.png / Shield.png) 20:29, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  5. From what I know of cosmic sceptic, he's not notable in any way relevant to RW Tulpa001 (talk) 05:38, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  6. I'm lenient towards articles on YouTubers if they're interesting or relevant or worth discussing even as examples of a wider phenomenon (100 YouTube views is about 95 more views than most academic papers get), but this is just a tiresome personal attack on a non-entity. He's been to Israel! He follows Jordan Peterson on YouTube! He said something vague about Ben Shapiro! He put up YouTube videos almost nobody watched! Hardly a criminal mastermind. It's hard to see how being in draftspace will make it better. If you can't entertain me or tell me why I should care, delete. --Annanoon (talk) 12:50, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  7. I think that qualifies as a hit piece. It's scraping the bottom of the barrel to make the guy look bad. Just because you've been to Israel doesn't mean you support everything done in the name of the Israeli government. And, yeah, the guy's a nobody. I also think it's about time we had another Great YouTube Purge. How about we only have articles on YouTubers with at least 10,000 subscribers? Spud (talk) 13:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
    As of now, CS has about 373,000 subscribers, but other than that, this article is pointless.Jeh2ow Damn son! 11:45, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
    Well, obviously the number of subscribers wouldn't be the only criterion for inclusion. But we could probably get rid of a few articles on non-entities if we took 10,000 as a cut off point. Spud (talk) 12:08, 17 September 2020 (UTC)




  1. The original author of this article is a newbie, and I was hoping to get some comment from them before just deleting the article. I might propose moving to drafts if they prefer. Tulpa001 (talk) 05:25, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
    Ok, move it to drafts then Catgrrl37-0 (talk) 09:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  2. Kind of tangentially missional. At least it's not simply "political". I would also like to see the original author's justification.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 15:29, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
    i did alert the author of this process when i initiated it, though to be honest they have not engaged with any criticism on the articles talk page. they have made minor tweaks to the article in meantime, so im doubting that they not are not simply unaware of the issues raised. AMassiveGay (talk) 20:21, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
    Sorry, I was busy with other stuffCatgrrl37-0 (talk) 09:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC