2025 RationalWiki 'Oregon Plan' Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!
Donations so far: $9223.37Goal: $10000

RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome | Result: Redirected[edit]

Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete[edit]

  1. Very hard to expand. 【DiamondDisc1】 (talk) 05:50, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
  2. The article was created on 20 July 2012 as two sentences (with references). The only things that have been added to it since then are a "See also", an external link and some templates. On 5 March 2017, the actual article is still just those two sentences. I think it's time to put it out of its misery. Spud (talk) 17:36, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
  3. The article sucks. Kill it.—127.0.0.1 Spinning-Burger.gif (talkstalk) 17:57, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
  4. I'm not opposed to short articles, but I believe this falls under hopelessly tiny stubs that have little effort poured into them. We're not supposed to fill in links for the sake of it if I recall correctly. The problem with this article that even for a stub, it conveys no meaningful information aside from two sentences of a summary on the work and it has remained as this for years. At this point, we should just wipe off clean on this one and hope for maybe a next attempt for somebody to actually pour more effort into this. In the meantime, a red link should convey more immediately that there is no information on this rather than lead our readers into a very empty article. LEFTYGREENMARIO 04:22, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Keep[edit]

  1. While currently a stub it's missional. Keep. Christopher (talk) 15:57, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
    I'm tired of seeing this damn argument over and over again that I created a page for it. See Fun:Missional fallacy.—127.0.0.1 Spinning-Burger.gif (talkstalk) 17:56, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
  2. See the above. It could do with expansion, but it's definitely missional.--JorisEnter (talk) 17:02, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
    Just because a page is missional doesn't excuse it of being shit. See Fun:Missional fallacy.—127.0.0.1 Spinning-Burger.gif (talkstalk) 17:56, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Merge/redirect[edit]

  1. Redirect to author, John C. Sanford - David Gerard (talk) 14:36, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
    Would be fine with it too if this happened instead. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 04:11, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
    That does sound reasonable. Spud (talk) 14:42, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
  2. Agree. Bongolian (talk) 08:09, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Goat[edit]