RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Fun:Conservapedia How To Guide
Fun:Conservapedia How To Guide | Result: Stomped
- View log) – (
- I deleted the page Fun:Conservapedia How To Guide because significant portions of it were copied from Liberapedia's article on Conservapedia. The creator of the article then restored it, unchanged, and added this disclaimer:
Inspired by the Conservapedia article on Liberapedia. (Edit summary: Gave credit to LP so that this is never deleted for plagiarism again) CowHouse (talk) 03:25, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- The plagiarism from Liberaapedia is reason enough to delete it. Also, we really don't need any more articles about Conservapedia. We've had two mass culls of articles about Conservapedia and we've slapped templates on the ones we've kept saying that cP isn;t really what we;re about anymore and readers can find more interesting stuff here. We are now firmly in post-Conservapedia times here. Spud (talk) 13:00, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- Plagiarism is lazy and stupid. In addition, who or what is a "Conservapedia"? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 16:49, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- No. Spud sums up pretty well, but I also need to bring up the creator's very bad conduct when dealing with other users. --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄(Mod) 16:54, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- Plagiarism. Kill it. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 17:33, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- That's just plain ridiculous! We could just change the instructions within the article to make them less Liberapedia-like! Why is that your solution to every problem on this wiki is to revert, revert, revert. Remove, remove, remove. Delete, delete, delete.? Oh, and before you start demanding specific examples (yes, I'm on to you now), I've already got quite a few:
- This article that you marked for deletion because of something that we can easily fix in a less drastic way.
It is for these reasons that I have come to be increasingly suspicious of you. Now you're going too far.