User:GabrielF/ConspiracyNoticeboard: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:31, 13 December 2006

Introduction, purpose and inclusion criteria

This page is a noticeboard for editors interested in conspiracy-related AfDs. It began life as a tool to help users easily track the flood of 9/11 conspiracy theory AfDs that started around the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. These AfDs primarily targetted articles on subjects with little or no notability, which violated WP:NPOV, WP:OR and WP:V and which were created (in my opinion) for the purpose of promoting people, ideas, and books rather than for furthering wikipedia's mission. A great many wikipedians agreed with this assessment and as a result approx. 44 articles were deleted and approx. 8 AfDs did not reach a consensus. Because there is significant interest in tracking AfDs related to other conspiracy theories, I have broadened the page and renamed it GabrielF/ConspiracyNoticeboard. Below I am formally defining the scope of the page based on its past usage and discussion at talk.

What can be included:

Articles, templates or miscellaneous pages dealing with conspiracy theories and their proponents, provided that the nominator feels that these pages either

Are Non-notable
Are Wikipedia:Vanispamcruftisements
Violate WP:NPOV, WP:NOR or WP:V
Are so inherently flawed that they cannot be brought up to wikipedia standards

What cannot be included:

Nominations based purely on the editors dislike of the subject of the article and not on policy
Articles unrelated to conspiracy theories

Finally, just because an AfD is listed here doesn't mean that I support it.

Note to editors - discuss this on the talk page, not here. When you add or comment on an XfD, please sign your comments. Thanks. GabrielF 02:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Current XfDs:

None

Misc. Discussions of interest

Operation Gladio Most pages that get talked about here are candidates for AFD, this page probably is not. There is probably enough reader/user interest in Operation Gladio to justify keeping it within WP in a verifiable form. However, in its currently it fails WP:RS, WP:V, WP:OR, and just about every other WP:anything that exists. It incorporates most every European conspiracy theory that anyone has ever heard of; including some that you probably have not. It really needs a point by point review to bring it up to guidelines, especially WP:RS and WP:V. If anyone has the time or inclination…please feel free. Brimba 07:18, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
The Saddam_Hussein_and_al-Qaeda_timeline article is in serious need of attention. It presents numerous Conspiracy Theories regarding alleged ties between Saddam/Iraq and al Qaeda as fact, when these theories have been refuted, rejected, denied and discounted by the U.S. Government, various U.S. Governmental hearings and commissions, and almost all the respected experts, many of whom are retired U.S. Intelligence. This is a clear case of misusing Wiki to advance fallacious and discredited Conspiracy Theories. Perhaps you all could help there. Thanks in advance. - F.A.A.F.A. 02:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Straw poll on whether to desysop Admins MONGO and Seabhcan. Morton devonshire 00:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Closed discussions

Deleted

Merged

No Consensus

Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_September_3#Template:911tm (19 deletes vs 7 keeps)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Terror Timeline (16 deletes vs 10 keeps)
Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/9/11:_Press_for_Truth (19 deletes vs 22 keeps)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/911: In Plane Site (second nomination) (21 keeps vs 21 deletes)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center (I'm not even going to try to count that mess; see Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion/Controlled_demolition_hypothesis_for_the_collapse_of_the_World_Trade_Center#Closing_rationales for closing admin's rationale)
Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Webster_G._Tarpley (26 deletes vs 9 keeps)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The War on Freedom - (21 deletes vs 13 keeps)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James W. Walter (second nomination) - (16 keeps vs 16 deletes)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rumours and conspiracy theories about the July 2005 London bombings

Kept

Deletion Review

Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_September_25#9-11: The Road to Tyranny -- deletion endorsed
Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006 October 22#Andy Stephenson -- deletion endorsed
Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 October_29#Walter Andrew Stephenson -- deletion endorsed
Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_November_4#Terrorstorm - deletion endorsed - see [1] GabrielF 22:01, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 #[[Operation Gladio]] Most pages that get talked about here are candidates for AFD, this page probably is not. There is probably enough reader/user interest in Operation Gladio to justify keeping it within WP in a verifiable form. However, in its currently it fails [[WP:RS]], [[WP:V]], [[WP:OR]], and just about every other WP:anything that exists. It incorporates most every European conspiracy theory that anyone has ever heard of; including some that you probably have not. It really needs a point by point review to bring it up to guidelines, especially WP:RS and WP:V. If anyone has the time or inclination…please feel free. [[User:Brimba|Brimba]] 07:18, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 #The [[Saddam_Hussein_and_al-Qaeda_timeline]] article is in serious need of attention. It presents numerous Conspiracy Theories regarding alleged ties between Saddam/Iraq and al Qaeda as fact, when these theories have been refuted, rejected, denied and discounted by the U.S. Government, various U.S. Governmental hearings and commissions, and almost all the respected experts, many of whom are retired U.S. Intelligence. This is a clear case of misusing Wiki to advance fallacious and discredited Conspiracy Theories. Perhaps you all could help there. Thanks in advance. - [[User:Fairness And Accuracy For All|F.A.A.F.A.]] 02:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
+#[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Seabhcan/Proposed_decision#Straw_poll_on_decision_to_desysop Straw poll on whether to desysop Admins MONGO and Seabhcan].  [[User:Morton devonshire|Morton devonshire]] 00:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 ==Closed discussions==