RationalWiki:Articles for demotion/Incel
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Incel | Result: No consensus[edit]
Promote to “Significantly problematic”[edit]
- Still not fully de-Neiltyfied; I suggest a full reset to before his very first edit to it, then work from there. Kill it (COI) with fire! --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularR
asoningSee my latest prototypes 08:46, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Status quo[edit]
Goat[edit]
- I'm already having flashbacks to the Child pornography AfD. (Though I also lack the context of what this Neilty did.) Luigifan18 (talk) 12:40, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- Me especially, I also feel a tad bit guilty about that article’s situation because of how I overreacted to that one “chaotic good” single-purpose (but still good-faith) editor who tried to (though very uncivilly) tell me- but I not only wouldn’t listen, but even said a few ignorant and outrageous things about the difficult topic that were very shit things to say. That editor was chaotic good, but I was stubbornly lawful good. --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularRasoningSee my latest prototypes 17:27, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- I read the talk page, but I didn't really get the context? There's semantic arguments over what constitutes an "incel" and a bunch of flaming. I'm also curious as to the context of why this article is a shitshow. Carthage (talk) 17:42, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Carthage This section. --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularRasoningSee my latest prototypes 18:41, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. Carthage (talk) 18:47, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Luigifan18 Basically, Neiltyson1fan was an incel moron who was obsessed with hijacking particular articles (like another long-term troll banned from here who has now used this method to completely take over the decrepit remains of RW’s childhood nemesis) he believed were solely his to edit and then carpet-bombing them with so much editorializing and edit-spam that it’s now notoriously hard to scour said articles of his long-term, well-disguised vandalism without voting on drastic changes like resetting to more than 500 edits ago, before he joined our site to whitewash for his little incel hugbox or obsessively fill a particular economics article with his very enlightened economic views. How he ever got sysop rights is a mystery, I figured we ought to know that benefit of the doubt is usually wasted on self-admitted incels with COIs. Eventually, he ended up getting banned for trying to dox one GrammarCommie (a now-LANCB’d old editor he had a grudge against) and (like the incel he is) creepily simping Techpriest off-site, and then tried evading the ban using BoNs, again continuing to foul up his two favorite articles with the exact same MO (30 edits per paragraph); it got so bad we had to perma-prot them so you have to be an autoconfirmed user to edit them. The MMT article has been deshittified, but this article has not yet been such properly (someone tried to earlier, but didn’t go far back enough). --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularRasoningSee my latest prototypes 23:26, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Luigifan18 Basically, Neiltyson1fan was an incel moron who was obsessed with hijacking particular articles (like another long-term troll banned from here who has now used this method to completely take over the decrepit remains of RW’s childhood nemesis) he believed were solely his to edit and then carpet-bombing them with so much editorializing and edit-spam that it’s now notoriously hard to scour said articles of his long-term, well-disguised vandalism without voting on drastic changes like resetting to more than 500 edits ago, before he joined our site to whitewash for his little incel hugbox or obsessively fill a particular economics article with his very enlightened economic views. How he ever got sysop rights is a mystery, I figured we ought to know that benefit of the doubt is usually wasted on self-admitted incels with COIs. Eventually, he ended up getting banned for trying to dox one GrammarCommie (a now-LANCB’d old editor he had a grudge against) and (like the incel he is) creepily simping Techpriest off-site, and then tried evading the ban using BoNs, again continuing to foul up his two favorite articles with the exact same MO (30 edits per paragraph); it got so bad we had to perma-prot them so you have to be an autoconfirmed user to edit them. The MMT article has been deshittified, but this article has not yet been such properly (someone tried to earlier, but didn’t go far back enough). --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularR
- Thanks. Carthage (talk) 18:47, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Carthage This section. --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularR
- I read the talk page, but I didn't really get the context? There's semantic arguments over what constitutes an "incel" and a bunch of flaming. I'm also curious as to the context of why this article is a shitshow. Carthage (talk) 17:42, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- Me especially, I also feel a tad bit guilty about that article’s situation because of how I overreacted to that one “chaotic good” single-purpose (but still good-faith) editor who tried to (though very uncivilly) tell me- but I not only wouldn’t listen, but even said a few ignorant and outrageous things about the difficult topic that were very shit things to say. That editor was chaotic good, but I was stubbornly lawful good. --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularR