RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/SJWiki

SJWiki | Result: More votes for delete than keep after a month. It's gone and nobody will miss it.

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

Delete

1. This article was deleted in 2015 and recently restored by @BadPiggies 9. The original reason for deletion was: Off-mission: Minor wikis with n o edits are not article content, regardless of whether the topic is mission. CowHouse (talk) 10:03, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
2. It's a very small stub that conveys barely any useful information. I'd go for expand, given if the wiki is notable to begin with, but either way, it cannot remain in its current state, and it should at the very least go to draft space. As for the merge option to a list, I believe that's another issue for another day, but we went through a Youtube purge and it might be worth looking into what websites to keep or to discard using similar criteria. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 18:55, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
3. Why are we covering a stillborn wiki? ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 12:35, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
4. Doesn't seem missional at all. ^{— Unsigned, by: Ibrahim_Moizoos / talk / contribs} 14:46, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
5. Just visited. Nothing of note here. Nerd (talk) 23:16, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Keep

1. We have tried to add lots of content to this article, and there seems to be quite a bit of information here. It is also quite relevant because SJWiki was (probably) created in response to us, as you will see in the article. Also, it is definitely missional, and should definitely be covered here on RW because it is a huge embarrassment to feminism, social justice, and the progressive left. It now has even more content than it did before, and I still see some more potential for this article on SJWiki. B'P"9 04:45, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
2. It's missional. RW has never been about notability and it's annoying that wannabe Wikipedians are trying to make it that way. $Spriggina$ $(talk)$ $(contribs)$ @ 17:58, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
3. As above. -Lankaster (talk) 23:44, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Merge/redirect

1. Add it to the list of wikis we already have. Contrary to what the above rationale for deleting the article was, SJWiki is missional because it deals heavily with social justice issues, just as RW does as well, although we don't focus exclusively on social justice, it's just one of many subjects that fall under the purview of our mission.--Palaeonictis (talk) 13:50, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

   But there is a point to this. Remember the Youtube purge? Shouldn't we also try to filter what we cover and what we don't cover on the same ideas that something should be notable enough? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 18:53, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

   Then why should we have spaces on the wiki dedicated to such "noteworthy" wikis such as Liberapedia? Should we do a wiki purge as well? I believe that there should be a limitation to these purges, and one must find a balance between missionality and notability.--Palaeonictis (talk) 14:49, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

2. Above reason.—HamburgerPlate  (talk • stalk) 14:14, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
3. I agree. We should just merge it with our already-existing article on wikis- just like Liberapedia, Uncyclopedia, and the others. Also, it is missional, since it focuses exclusively on social justice (like us), albeit to a far more extreme level. Also, its articles seem to go on and on about how evil all priveleged people are, to the point that it's almost like the far-left equivalent of CP. It's funny. B'P"9 18:50, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

   Do you mean "extensively"? We don't focus exclusively on social justice. CowHouse (talk) 03:46, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

   I never said we did. B'P"9 04:47, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

   Quote: "Also, it is missional, since it focuses exclusively on social justice (like us)". CowHouse (talk) 05:53, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

   Nah, CowHouse, don't be pedantic. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 18:32, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

4. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 04:24, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
5. A section on the wiki page is all that this needs. Spud (talk) 15:30, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Goat

• FWIW, it was inspired by one of the RW Facebook groups, so it's vaguely descended from RW. List in the wikis article? Maybe - David Gerard (talk) 21:27, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
• It seems pretty dead, not that that stops us from documenting citizendidumb. ikanreed ^{🐐Bleat at me} 17:55, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
• A whole lot of meh is all I have to say about this. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 00:03, 11 November 2018 (UTC)