RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Lucia Eggenhoffer

Lucia Eggenhoffer | Result: Deleted

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

Delete

1. According to the article she’s best known for trolling people on Twitter, but she has less than 4000 Twitter followers. Article is also poorly written but I think the complete lack of notability is more important here, why have an article on her and not one of the thousands of similar accounts? Christopher (talk) 21:13, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
2. Yeah, we really don’t need an article on every random TERF. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 22:35, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
3. Completely irrelevant twitter troll. Unless she has news coverage which the article doesn't suggest she has, this article will not likely be relevant to our interests. Begone I say. Techpriest (talk) 23:14, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
4. Lacks notability. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 ^talk 23:23, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
5. "Needless to say the entirety of her existence is dedicated to the war on transgender people..." is my new favourite Poe. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 00:26, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
6. it would take some superhuman feat of fuckery to make a troll on twitter noticeable, let alone notable. AMassiveGay (talk) 00:31, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
7. We used to often say, "A nobody with a blog is still a nobody." A nobody with a Twitter account is hardly even worth thinking about. Spud (talk) 00:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
8. Wait, when did RationalWiki suddenly turn into TwitterDramaWiki? Subject is about as notable as my youtube channel, whose only content to date is a video of my younger, dumber self intentionally installing malware on a virtual machine I used to have, a reupload of a deceased channel's video I liked that I had luckily youtube-dl'd, along with 2 videos that were so cringe, I have since made them both private. --Goatspeed. _{Stop the War On Secularism}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{Steal my ideas} 05:51, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Keep

1. She is highly active as an explicit TERF/transphobe on Twitter where her entire activity is focused on direct and extreme attacks on trans people, frequently retweeted by the main TERF groups. --CharlotteTakveis (talk) 21:18, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

   But that's not a high bar to cross is it? --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 05:16, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

   If that's the criteria for inclusion on this wiki, then why stop at this lady? Why not create articles for the better part of all cisgender Englishwomen over 50 who purport to be feminists? If you're some random, attention-seeking TERF on some glorified digital madhouse screeching about how all trans women are evil because some trans girl bullied you in school then you just don't deserve the free clout from a RationalWiki article- even if many other skeptics may have sadly been turned off by the moonbat brigading of our site a few months ago. While I've spent much of the past half-month since the end of my self-imposed educational leave working alongside you in your mostly-constructive contributions to our big articles on TERFs and sex-negative feminists with a smile on my face, your recent behavior and morbid obsession with random e-TERFs and mildly problematic messages from obscure British aristocrats on Twitter are fast making me lose all my respect for you... --Goatspeed. _{Stop the War On Secularism}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{Steal my ideas} 06:00, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Goat

• How relevant is this person in the real world? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 21:34, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

  She appears to be influential in the TERFosphere on Twitter. While she only has about 4,000 followers directly, her reach is greater because she is so active (nearly 20,000 tweets all dedicated to attacking trans people) and because of her apparent position as an 'authority' of some kind within the largest TERF groups such as WHRC and LGB Alliance that claim to be active in numerous countries. I see her constantly in the feeds of those organizations and other prominent TERFs with larger followings. She also readily identifies herself as a TERF via the dogwhistles in her profile and the content she posts and promotes. CharlotteTakveis (talk) 22:10, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

  Twitter isn't the real world. Outside of morons like Trump, people don't base policies off tweets. They base policies off activist groups, media scandals, international pressures, etc. So I'll ask again, how relevant is this person in the real world? How much policy does she actually affect? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 22:17, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

  This is one of my minor articles that I didn't spend that much time on. If others believe significance on Twitter isn't enough to be notable here, that's fine by me. Having direct influence on policy is a rather high bar, though. CharlotteTakveis (talk) 22:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

  Is it? Tucker Carlson, while not a power broker or politician has influence on policy. Same with Murdock and his media empire. They have effect. We don't have articles on half the YouTube talking heads who imitate these figures for a reason, and that reason is most of them don't have any real effect. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 23:05, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

• Maybe you could have a brief list of Twitter assholes on your user subpages or essayspace. --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 23:47, 13 June 2021 (UTC)