RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Anomaly 2021
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Jonathan Anomaly | Result: Keep[edit]
Delete[edit]
- A colleague of Nathan Cofnas whose article was deleted for being a nobody. The only minor controversy Anomaly has caused is writing a paper on eugenics. Anomaly has said: "In hindsight, I just should’ve used a different title" to his paper. He is only very peripherally involved in writing on HBD. Apolloniatis (talk) 19:17, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep[edit]
- Just because you're not saying that this is another Smith coverup deletion doesn't make it not another Smith coverup deletion. Voting against for this reason alone. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! /
/ 
/ 
) 21:15, 28 April 2021 (UTC) - New account, immediate AfD application, hmmm. Seems to be a a growing pattern. Revolverman (talk) 21:27, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- I don't trust you, pal. Sorry. Can change my vote in the future. GeeJayK (talk) 21:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- We honestly should undelete the Cofnas article as well.𝔖𝔲𝔪𝔪𝔞 𝔄𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔬𝔩𝔬𝔤𝔦𝔠𝔞 (𝔮𝔲𝔢𝔯𝔢𝔩𝔦𝔰) (𝔰𝔠𝔯𝔦𝔭𝔱𝔲𝔯𝔞) 22:13, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- AfD created by a
PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 22:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC) - —cosmikdebris talk stalk 00:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Kauri0.o (talk) 04:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Bongolian (talk) 07:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Merge/redirect[edit]
Goat[edit]
- No idea how notable this guy is, but his article suggests he’s been involved in more than one race-related “controversy” (contrary to the AfD creator’s claims).
- I personally don’t mind this AfD staying up, but wouldn’t object to anyone else who wanted to delete given that it was created by a banned user. Christopher (talk) 19:30, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- He's a Philosophy Politics & Economics professor at University of Pennsylvania, and honestly from what I can Google isn't terribly notable. (See the papers in Google Scholar.) The problem is, racialism is a fringe topic in modern academia (because, er, it's not supported by scientific evidence, of course). If notability is a requirement for documentation of a racialist, barely any racialist in this Wiki would qualify. (The only major story I remember in this vein that actually was notable enough in the common media is The Bell Curve. I guess, Googling, someone like Steve Sailer also would qualify for things like VDare etc.). Like Cofnas, Anomaly is part of the Quillette HBD bullshitting brigade. Also, Google Scholar shows that he's a repeat offender in promoting questionable genetic views. That may not be enough, it's not much. But I don't like having to instantly decide so on the whims of some clear trolls. (The article may be written by a banned user, but there's a good chance the person pushing this AfD is also a banned user.) PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 23:06, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- The fact that one person was saying a load of articles created by Smith should be deleted while at the same time saying that Smith was unjustly banned and should be allowed to come back makes it pretty obvious we were dealing with a Smith sock. It's not the first time he's asked for articles he's created to be deleted because the people they're about have started harassing him. Some of those articles probably should be deleted but "the person this page is about doesn't like it" in itself is never a good reason for deletion. Spud (talk) 01:21, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- He's a Philosophy Politics & Economics professor at University of Pennsylvania, and honestly from what I can Google isn't terribly notable. (See the papers in Google Scholar.) The problem is, racialism is a fringe topic in modern academia (because, er, it's not supported by scientific evidence, of course). If notability is a requirement for documentation of a racialist, barely any racialist in this Wiki would qualify. (The only major story I remember in this vein that actually was notable enough in the common media is The Bell Curve. I guess, Googling, someone like Steve Sailer also would qualify for things like VDare etc.). Like Cofnas, Anomaly is part of the Quillette HBD bullshitting brigade. Also, Google Scholar shows that he's a repeat offender in promoting questionable genetic views. That may not be enough, it's not much. But I don't like having to instantly decide so on the whims of some clear trolls. (The article may be written by a banned user, but there's a good chance the person pushing this AfD is also a banned user.) PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 23:06, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
