Talk:Areo Magazine

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Icon politics.svg

This Politics related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Steelbrain.png

So[edit]

So this magazine is basically a [redacted] knock off? 95.143.195.157 (talk) 22:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

judging by the article author I think its safe to say its closely related with a similar purpose and ideological stance. EK (talk) 23:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Judging the content of a defamatory article, it might indeed look that way. 80.233.32.252 (talk) 18:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Pro-tip: "article I don't like" =/= defamatory. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 22:01, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Grievance studies hoax[edit]

Probably should get s brief summary of it in this page. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 02:54, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Problematic edit(s) reverted[edit]

[1] There's nothing 'heterodox' about Areo Magazine. Look at some recent articles:

Right-wing talking points - "anti-white" racism, pro-nuclear energy, etc. Boring stuff. Ernor (talk) 17:34, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

What exactly was the problem?[edit]

User Carthage Sock apparently undid my changes. How come? MalAdeptus (talk) 20:54, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Whitewashing. Such as changing the description of from "racist" to "controversial political scientist". Carthage (talk) 20:58, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
"Racist" is pretty strong. He keeps insisting that he does not view non-whites as inferior in value. But I can restore this if you want. Maybe "commonly associated with racism"? MalAdeptus (talk)

Assuming "Carthage sock" is you, I should say: I undid your edit with the suggestion incorporated. Should I modify something else, too? MalAdeptus (talk) 21:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

HAH HAH HAH imagine believing that is not a racist. It's like the man said: "Any serious inquiry into ’s actual body of work must conclude that, if is not a racist, the word “racist” is empty of meaning. — Nathan J. Robinson And there is definitely something fishy about this MalAdeptus character. Pinkerite (talk) 01:23, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Question to RMF[edit]

Recently two articles were deleted for an out of court settlement. However, the same alleged defamatory statements those articles were deleted for appear on other articles. I tried to delete this content but my edits were reverted by @Pinkerite. I guess Pinkerite wants this website taken offline or sued again? 134.122.22.67 (talk) 17:31, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, the plaintiffs' demand was that articles about themselves be removed from Rational Wiki. Until there is evidence provided that the settlement agreed to remove all references to the plaintiffs in other articles, there is no reason to do so. And certainly no reason for a rando bunch of numbers account to go around removing them. Pinkerite (talk) 17:38, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
@Pinkerite you need to ask on the RMF noticeboard (locked for new editors) what the hell is going on since the RMF is deleting articles not in those plaintiff's complaints. For example, the PolygenX (Anomaly's company) article was deleted yesterday. These sneaky deletions don't even easily appear in the logs. The RMF however is keeping everyone in the dark what is going on. Clearly they are still negotiating with the plaintiffs but they have not updated anyone and kept everyone else in the dark. 157.245.135.188 (talk) 17:48, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
Board members have deleted the articles about the plaintiffs, indicating it was in response to a settlement. If these other articles that mention the plaintiffs were related to the terms of the settlement, I'm confident that the RMF board members would have taken care of it. In any case, there's no reason that I can see for some rando accounts to go around deleting content from articles not related to the terms of the settlement. Pinkerite (talk) 17:55, 23 April 2025 (UTC)