Information icon.svg Nominations and campaigning for the RationalWiki 2021 Moderator Election are completed. Voting is live now, until 17:00 UTC, 30 November!

RationalWiki talk:Do we keep these CP-related articles?

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Wow. That's a lot of articles. I'd keep the primary stuff for sure, for archival purposes (the transcripts of his testimonials, etc.). Other than that, besides WIG and our serious article on Andy, I could see most of it go. P-Foster Talk ""Santorum is the cream rising to the top."" 00:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Anything petty, obsessive, and name-calling is what I'd like to see go. Much of the stuff on this list is on-mission and well done. Nutty Rouxnever mind 01:53, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Pretty much what Foster said. Тycommunications wire 02:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Keep everything, move poor material into essay-space or some other archive.

If we delete anything, do not delete any pages that directly refute Conservapedia material. These are the most important pages to have. Keep pages about important Conservapedia sysops. However, parodists and vandals like MexMax aren't necessary. Mr. Anon (talk) 02:03, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

This officious RC clogging bullshit is completely unnecessary. Why are we voting on every single page in the space? Jesus christ people. Nutty Rouxnever mind 04:57, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree filling RC with it is annoying, but is there really much else going on atm either? --il'Dictator Mikal 05:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
That's not really the question, is it? I don't give a shit what you want to pay attention to. The point is this is pointless makework cockgobblery. 80% of these pages are beyond question. I guess I'll go through and remove the obvious ones tomorrow. Is that alright with you Mikalos? Nutty Rouxnever mind 05:07, 30 March 2012 (UTC)


I tell you now: these headers are not going to work. Too late now though... Peter tanquam ex ungue leonem 03:14, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I could run a find/replace real quick... Тyeh? 03:17, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Do it! Peter tanquam ex ungue leonem 03:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Keep the lectures[edit]

given all the work put into them, or move them to irons userspace as he did most of the work on the side-by-side--il'Dictator Mikal 03:53, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

They gotta stay, I agree. P-Foster Talk ""Santorum is the cream rising to the top."" 03:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
More importantly, we should have one very well written article on Andy as a teacher, and say "here's examples of his lectures, homework, etc., if you want to see more". and archive everything he's done "as a teacher". cause he's scary.--Pink mowse.pngGodot What do cats dream about? 17:05, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Poor recent changes[edit]

You can't hurt her anymore. Tmtoulouse (talk) 05:11, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Resolved issues[edit]

Could the resolved issues please be moved to the subpage RationalWiki:Do we keep these CP-related articles?/Resolved instead of being just deleted? Accountability and all that? larronsicut fur in nocte 06:47, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps. But that will take some digging to find all the ones Foster and Ty have deleted in the last 24 hours.... Peter tanquam ex ungue leonem 06:49, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Also, there was a half-discussion on Foster's talk page. Your problem is apathy more than anything else. Peter tanquam ex ungue leonem 06:52, 31 March 2012 (UTC)


What's the general MO here? Call it resolved at a 5/1 ratio or something like that? Also, are people alright with moving some stuff to funspace, or will that just cause further problems? Also, is there a way to make this talk page appear in RC without including the article too? Turpis 3:16 (talk) 15:00, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

We burned the stuff like this from funspace last year, so yes that would cause more problems. Тycommunications wire 19:17, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Oh I don't want to move things there wholesale, but there are a few which are well suited to the funspace, and I would prefer that to deletion. Someone already moved Liberals: The Garnering there. Mostly I'm thinking about the Obama-Schalfly comparison, which is largely my creation and I quite like it. Fun seems like a good place for it to me. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 22:14, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Could we at least have 72 hours before deletion, if we're going to pretend to vote? I mean, we've had several conversations about it, and most of them were for a week for voitng. steriletalk 16:38, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Also, I would put this back into Recent Changes, or at least send out an intercom, SO PEOPLE KNOW IT'S HERE. steriletalk 16:46, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
For anything at all controversial we should have voting for at least a week, but those obvious cases one way or the other should be removed just so this page can get down to a manageable size. That's why I suggested the 5/1 ratio; not that we should use that as the overall standard, but when something is as one-sided as that we should be able to speedy the process along. If we can take care of the obvious keeps and obvious deletes we can probably have a page whose size won't intimidate the rest of the users and we can hopefully corral a bunch of them over here for their input. As of now it takes a special kind of masochist (of which I am one) to try to tackle this at all. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 22:18, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Donation Surge[edit]

Please keep us informed of the huge increase in donations that the RationalWiki Foundation will now undoubtedly receive now that that the RationalWiki Foundation has eradicated all traces of Conservapedia on the Internet!!! Olé Olé Olé!!!!

Will the RationalWiki Foundation now challenge Spanish ladies to a debate? Stay tuned for further developments!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Conservative

Half the fun[edit]

Half the fun of this page is seeing the newbies WTFing at the stuff RW used to get up to. Sophiebecause liberals 07:59, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

It's fun for the newbies too, sorta. Peter tanquam ex ungue leonem 08:00, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Basis for decisions - or what is CP space for?[edit]

Just glancing at the talk comments I see comments along the lines of. Delete or keep - it's on or not on mission. Delete it's out of date. Keep it's an important part of CP history. Delete it's not funny. Keep it's funny. And so on.

I would like to suggest that we should have a clear idea of what CP space is for - what do we want to be in it - before we decide what should and should not be deleted.--Bob"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." 17:14, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

(By the way, I don't expect this to actually happen - I just felt that the point should be made.)--Bob"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." 17:17, 4 April 2012 (UTC)


A lot of entries now have several votes each for keep or delete. Do we leave it open for anyone else to pitch in with an opinion, or close as "no consensus"? Personally I think we've broken the back of this and cleared out most of the worst stuff, and we should think about mothballing this page in a couple of days. Sophiebecause liberals 21:36, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good. Тyeh? 02:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
When you say "moth ball the page" do you mean close it and keep everything that hasn't been deleted, or run through everything and keep or delete based on what votes we have so far? I think the problem is almost everything is being decided by a handful of people, which is how it has to be for the majority obvious calls, but for the debatable ones we really should have more input from the community, even if it means keeping this going for a while. It seems like most of these are getting skimmed quickly, sometime with votes based more on title than content. I think we need to err on the side of keep here, especially now that we've vaporized 200+ worst offenders. However, that doesn't mean there aren't others just as bad on this page which just haven't been looked at enough yet. Anyway, I don't think there's any hurry here, and commenters are still trickling in. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 13:06, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Send out another call on the intercom to lure fresh voters, point out that the list is a lot shorter? P-Foster Talk "Armed with the knowledge of our past we can charter a course for our future"--MX 14:20, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
We should also consider it's the Easter weekend, people may be on holiday and not RWing. My opening comment wasn't meant as "let's close this now now now."Sophiebecause liberals 09:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Just so people know, this page is or soon will be back in Recent Changes, as its edit count has been so low. That may or may not spur more people to participate. We'll see. I'm waiting for the Coop business to die down before begininning a final push to try to settle the remaining entries. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 18:52, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Good idea. I've been trying to give a few minutes a day to it, and voted on the easy stuff. It'll take time to review what remains. I'd say delete just about anything without cites or external links, or move it to Fun/Essay space if it has some humourous value. nobsCorporations are people, too. 19:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

What I intend to do (heads up)[edit]

No one seems interested in this now, so I'm going to go through and and remove as many as I can as keeps or deletes, erring on the side of keep. After that, I'll take the remaining 100+ and put them in categories, which might facilitate a few more votes by some people. The categories will be along the lines of side by sides, parody, users, terms, snark, etc. If we still have a bunch without a clear consensus I don't know what to do exactly. Probably close most as default keep and let them be nominated separately sometime in the future. Turpis 3:16 (talk) 21:05, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Shut the fuck up Turpis. I am sick of your bellyaching. AceModerator 21:06, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
(EC) Alrighty. ТyYarrr 21:07, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
If nobody cares if they stay or go, let them stay. All the obviously crap ones are in redspace now. Sophiebecause liberals 21:09, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

While you're at it...[edit]

RationalWiki:Contents is almost 1/3 CP. Don't just rip it apart, since we are (let's face it) the go-to resource for all they do wrong, but perhaps all those links could be reduced to CP portal or something, perhaps? ħumanUser talk:Human 02:19, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

CP portal, The Relativity, Andrew, Lenski perhaps? ТyrannisAn iron, but caring, fist 02:31, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
What...? Oh, you mean what to keep? Best discussed on its own talk page, but, yeah, something like that. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:57, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I'll go bring it up there. ТyrannisAn iron, but caring, fist 02:58, 10 May 2012 (UTC)


Instead of deleting pages, how about just redirecting them all to Conservapedia? That way, no red links.--"Shut up, Brx." 20:57, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

That's not gonna work. Most of them are linked from other CP-space articles, not mainspace. It will create a lot of broken redirects (as much hassle to deal with as cleaning up the redlinks properly would be) and when it does work, it will be pointless. WéáśéĺóíďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 21:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
So we can't just do this? Because that's what I meant--"Shut up, Brx." 21:21, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
There is no physical barrier, but it would be pointless and confusing. Peter with added ‼Science‼ 21:27, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Well, it'd get rid of the red links, which seems to be one of the principle complaints about deleting this stuff.--"Shut up, Brx." 21:34, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Red links are just the excuse some people use to justify not deleting CP stuff. There are redlinks all over the wiki. But few of the ones that link here are in mainspace.--Green mowse.pngGodot 21:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Exactly. There are about zero redlinks to CPspace from mainspace now. Blue Talk 21:53, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
When you delete stuff, you should check the "what links here" list, and fix or remove the links accordingly. There's no reason to make up new processes to compensate for people being too lazy to do this bit of basic housekeeping. €₳$£ΘĪÐWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 22:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

On a related subject[edit]

Should we remove the redlinks from talk archives as well as the articles? Peter with added ‼Science‼ 00:57, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Eh; not worth it or important enough.--il'Dictator Mikal 01:09, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
There is a potential for 'See here' situations that are confusing if the link is gone. It would be done with a bot, so the question is what should be skipped? Peter with added ‼Science‼ 01:22, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
I say no. And wow, you guys really cleaned the house here. There are like what, five articles left in CP-space? Nihilist 01:43, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
I predict one day we will remove CP-space itself as we move forward; so even less CP-related articles!--il'Dictator Mikal 01:46, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
I think that would be a good move. Honestly, all we need are several articles on them. Nihilist 01:48, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
No to what? No to not not not removing the redlinks? Peter with added ‼Science‼ 02:17, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Time to close this[edit]

All the voting is long over, and there's no consensus to delete what's left. I suggest moving all these to the resolved page as keeps. SophieWilder 09:46, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Works for me buddy. Reckless Noise Symphony (talk) 09:48, 8 March 2013 (UTC)