RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Fractal wrongness

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Fractal wrongness | Result: Keep[edit]

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

Delete[edit]

  1. I expect this Afd to fail really hard. Fractal wrongness is, after all, a funny page. But the more I read this page, the more I'm convinced that there is no formal definition of "fractal wrongness" rather than "hey, we really disagree with this person". In the end, it has the same problems of the wingnuttert/moonbattery pages that we deleted not long ago: it's just a subjective insult, not a real thing. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:35, 25 October 2023 (UTC) GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:35, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
  2. While it's a fun idea, I'm inclined to agree with Gee that the concept can't really be cashed out cohesively. I think the failure to develop a strong list of examples in itself suggests that the concept is too vague to be usefully applied, and the "turducken of bullshit", as described, doesn't strike me as compelling. Citing a bullshitter citing a bullshitter isn't meaningfully different from just citing the original bullshitter directly; the cited statement is just as wrong either way. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 talk 02:25, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. The examples could be culled, as some seem to be just "wrong", not fractally wrong. Fractal wrongness is a real thing that occurs in conspiracy theories, as noted by Mike Rothschild's "turducken of bullshit". Bongolian (talk) 19:59, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
  2. I have a soft spot for this one. Pumpkin pixel glow.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoTry our pumpkin spice lasagna! 02:50, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
  3. Can be redeemed. Look to older versions of the page for inspiration. Because of the trouble in maintaining the examples list, it might be worth either removing it or better yet slimming it down to the most obvious-on-face crazies. David Icke, Scientologists, TimeCube, sovereign citizens, that sort of thing. Though people are always going to come along trying to coat-rack it (a 2015 version of the page listed Keynesian economics as an example — lol). But at minimum: I say it's a valid concept. Chillpilled (talk) 05:50, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
    And I will add, fractal wrongness is something that pops up in forums and social media all the time and example I am currently addressing (UTC 02:46:35 Friday, October 27, 2023) on Facebook "The order of dates of evolution are very self-contradictory... Some of the oldest tools took more than a space of 100,000 years for man to use them. If it took this long for simple tools to be created by modern man, then why did it take 168 years to make the first touchscreen phones..." The post continues, but it is another example of very fundamental flaws resting on severe misunderstandings of basic concepts, such that the whole thesis is unsalvageable. "Wrong at every scale of resolution" is exactly the case in some instances. — Unsigned, by: 172.221.145.72 / talk
  4. Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:49, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
  5. Daemonspudguy (talk) 22:01, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

  1. My vote is to redirect this to either funspace or essay space. I think that Serene and GJK are in the right of things, and we have better articles on this subject anyway (our article on bullshit, for instance). However, I'm not really in favor of a hard delete either, since fractal wrongness can be argued to occur (QAnon, for instance), but the inherent vagueness of the concept makes it pretty weak as an analytical tool. Carthage (talk) 17:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

  1. I culled some of the shit from the list previously. I think both points are valid, but I'm leaning slightly towards "keep" for the reasons Bongolian laid out. The list also suffers from a lack of citations, which should be fixed. Inclusion of a random element of music theory was especially egregious. etc etc etc. Carthage (talk) 20:03, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
  2. Abstain. Sort of on the border of warrenting deletion or not. Anyway, carry on as if I don't exist because I retired nearly a year ago and haven't edited in exactly five months. Andrew5 mobile (talk) 21:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)