RationalWiki:Articles for demotion/FAQ for the Newly Deconverted

FAQ for the Newly Deconverted | Result: Tie[edit]

The article lacks citations for huge chunks of text, and unlike the Pascal's Wager article, where I feel that citations are not necessarily needed as most of the content is extrapolating from the wager itself and thus not requiring many citations, this article makes many claims and doesn't cite any sources for most if any (Look at the section on The Bible for a particularly egregious example of this). TheOneAndOnlyCirrusMan (talk) 23:09, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Uh, that's not an argument in favor of demotion. On RationalWiki, "demotion" means increasing the article's ranking. (It's some weird in-joke, I don't get it myself.) Luigifan18 (talk) 17:13, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

It needs a thorough read-through and edit by someone. I don't have time for it at the moment, but a short skim, I see that there's at least one quotation without a citation and at one missing link. Bongolian (talk) 19:34, 23 August 2024 (UTC) Wait, I didn't even look at the existing brainstar. It's been gold/cover story since 2008! That said, the standards for gold were a bit looser back then, so it still needs some cleanup. Bongolian (talk) 07:00, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

I think he wants to have it moved down a brainstar Ioe bidome (talk) 17:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@TheOneAndOnlyCirrusMan When you say "demote", you want to have it moved down to silver or bronze (or no brainstar at all), right? RW uses "demote" and "promote" opposite the way most people would. Ioe bidome (talk) 16:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Ohhhhhh. TheOneAndOnlyCirrusMan (talk) 17:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)